Bug#775588: [Pkg-haskell-maintainers] Bug#775588: darcs: Missing copyright information

2015-01-26 Thread beuc
Hi, How about lowering the severity of this bug? I just received this: fusionforge 5.3.2+20141104-3 is marked for autoremoval from testing on 2015-03-02 It (build-)depends on packages with these RC bugs: 775588: darcs: Missing copyright information Cheers! Sylvain -- To

Bug#775588: [Pkg-haskell-maintainers] Bug#775588: darcs: Missing copyright information

2015-01-18 Thread Joachim Breitner
Hi, Am Samstag, den 17.01.2015, 19:39 +0100 schrieb Christian Kastner: The copyright information and the license terms for the files src/Crypt/* is missing from debian/copyright. One file is GPL (no version specified, and the others are BSD-3-clause licensed. Package

Bug#775588: [Pkg-haskell-maintainers] Bug#775588: darcs: Missing copyright information

2015-01-18 Thread Christian Kastner
On 2015-01-18 13:52, Joachim Breitner wrote: Am Samstag, den 17.01.2015, 19:39 +0100 schrieb Christian Kastner: The copyright information and the license terms for the files src/Crypt/* is missing from debian/copyright. I wonder: Since it is a mix of GPL and BSD, we are effectively

Bug#775588: [Pkg-haskell-maintainers] Bug#775588: darcs: Missing copyright information

2015-01-18 Thread Joachim Breitner
Hi, Am Sonntag, den 18.01.2015, 14:49 +0100 schrieb Christian Kastner: Perhaps I misunderstood something, but to be clear: some files are distributed under the GPL, and some under a BSD license. The combination thereof doesn't change this, there is no dual-licensing or license-mixing here.

Bug#775588: [Pkg-haskell-maintainers] Bug#775588: darcs: Missing copyright information

2015-01-18 Thread Christian Kastner
On 2015-01-18 15:09, Joachim Breitner wrote: Well, that’s how the files are distributed to Debian. But that doesn’t mean that Debian cannot re-license them all under the GPL... At least I thought that BSD code can generally be relicensed under the GPL. Oh, now I understand what you mean. What