On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 12:32:49AM +0200, Arnout Engelen wrote:
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 04:34:45PM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 14:44:08 (CEST), Arnout Engelen wrote:
> Right - the README does contain a copyright line, states it's GPL > and links to gnu.org As for not including the GPL license text, is > that a problem?
[snip]
It must be absolutely clear for any party, including the people that are interested in redistributing work from us (think sidux, ubuntu or other derivative distributions) what the exact redistribution terms are. Otherewise there is a considerable risk that the archive admistrators decide to not include your work in the archive.


I'd say the README pretty clearly states jack-tools is GPL'ed - and after all, the old now-orphaned jack-tools had the same problem and made it into Debian fine.

We all want to do our best. Now that you want to work on this packaging, some of us take a fresh look at the packaging and discover flaws which were also flaws in the past, just not noticed.

Noone has the intend of "testing you" or something like that! :-)


Nonetheless, as promised before, I'll prepare a patch that gets everything into the form recommended by GNU and ask upstream (Rohan) to apply it.

Great!


Kind regards,

 - Jonas

--
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Reply via email to