On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 07:26:50PM +0100, Alessandro Ghedini wrote:
On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 08:28:17PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
If any other files (which are used for the resulting binaries) is GPL-2 (i.e. without permitting later revisions), then they are incompatible.

For my packaging stuff I usually use the same license as the upstream sources (just like an "extension" of the software itself), and so I've done in this case (since foo-yc20 is GPL-3+).

Also, it limits the ability to reuse across packages, due to same kind of limitations.

That's a good point, but I've always seen the Debian part of a package tightly related to the software it referes to and so much difficult to reuse anyway. But I lack in experience, and probably in this I'm wrong.

This is not a competition - it is not about "right" and "wrong", but about comparing styles of packaging patterns and inspire each other and maybe improve and mature. :-)

 - 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

Reply via email to