On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 05:56:07PM +0100, Alessandro Ghedini wrote:
I had a look at the FIXMEs and there are indeed some problems (sorry, if I didn't notice that before):

Files: src/milkyplay/drivers/generic/rtaudio/asio/asio.cpp
Copyright: 1997, - 2005, Steinberg Media Technologies GmbH
License: UNKNOWN

I couldn't find a license for the asio driver, but I think that it can be safely removed, since it is not needed on Linux (this applies for every file under the 'src/milkyplay/drivers/generic/rtaudio/asio/' folder).


Repackaging can be done elegantly using CDBS. Should I do that or do you want to try?

Files: src/milkyplay/drivers/generic/rtaudio/oss/soundcard.h
Copyright: *No copyright*
License: other-restricted!

This is clearly not DFSG-compliant... I also think that it can be removed and substituted with the soundcard.h provided by the oss4-dev package (which seems to be free).

Ok, should be ripped out, then. But instead of substituting I guess it is better to build-depend on oss4-dev and patch source to include that.

Files: resources/reference/xmeffects.html
 2006, Yury Aliaev 2006
License: GFDL and UNKNOWN

This has to be removed as well (GNU FDL is not DFSG-compatible).

I believe GNU FSL _is_ DFSG-compliant as long as it has no invariant sections.

Reason I tagged it as FIXME was the INTERNET ARCHIVE JavaScript code being copyright protected with no licensing!

There is something I don't understand: is it really needed to have both 'GPL+Milkytracker-3+' and 'GPL-3+' licenses, since they are the same license?

It is a new understanding of mine, but I believe so: Debian Policy mandated including "verbatim copy" of the licensing info. Which means we may rewrap (and I consistently wrap at 72 chars) but not "replace" words.

You are right that both declare same licensing, but that is the file shipped below /usr/share/common-licenses/ . The text here is is not the actual license, only an indirect licensing _statement_.

Feel free to run it by the debian-legal@ list.  I might be wrong...

Also, for the generic 'LGPL' what version should be used?

Best would be to investigate what version was actually intended. Lack of that, we should assume version 1, I believe.

 - 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