On ചൊവ്വ 10 ഒക്ടോബര്‍ 2017 12:31 വൈകു, Chris Lamb wrote:
> No.
> Pirate, please read over the following extremely carefully before replying
> as I would like to avoid either of us becoming frustrated by these repeated
> failures at conversation.
> The situation, as I understand it, is as follows:
> a) You uploaded 6.25.0+dfsg-13 with a debian/copyright including the
>    following:
>    11 Files: packages/babel-preset-es2015/test/fixtures/traceur/*
>    12 Copyright: [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
>    13 License: Apache-2.0
>    14 Comment: name of copyright holder is missing
> b) This "[yyyy] [name of copyright owner]" placeholder text comes
>    from the LICENSE file.
> c) The portion of the LICENSE file where it comes from is part of
>    the usual "How to apply this license to your own code." This is
>    what was meant by "meta statement" in my original REJECT.
> d) The statement in debian/copyright therefore has no meaning
>    whatsover, likely just a false positive from whatever tool you
>    are using to generate such files.
> e) (It is therefore totally irrelevant to this disuss whether the
>    tests are used, whether the package is "useful", whether its
>    packages in NEW or contrib depend on it, etc. You seem fixated
>    on this point.)

I have suggested two possible solutions and you seem to be fixated on
the semantics of the problem than a solution.

Now with those files removed from the source tarball, lets move on.
Please see if the current uploads in NEW meets the criteria.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list

Reply via email to