> On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 03:18:47AM +0200, Shaul Karl wrote: > > [22:42:00 src]$ tail -n 9 tkman-2.1b4/README-tkman > > > > Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software and its > > documentation for documentation for any purpose, without fee, and > > without a written agreement is hereby granted. This software is > > provided on as "as is" basis, without any warranty whatsoever. > > "documentation for documentation for" looks like a classic typo > (where the typist loses track of what's been typed and types a > phrase twice). > > If that's the case it should be a trivial fix. >
The situation is that I am trying to maintain TkMan while applying to be a debian maintainer. The new TkMan license is stated above. Yet as far as I understand this license is not enough for asking to get TkMan into main since TkMan depends on rman which is in non-free. It's been more then a week when I posted my message but "Stephen M. Moraco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, the debian maintainer of rman did not reply me. Should I wait more? Should I email him my message again? Is that because I am not a debian maintainer? I am considering approaching the author again, this time about rman. I already approached him about TkMan and he seems to be most cooperative. Suppose I was a debian maintainer, is it ethical of me to approach the upstream author about a package that I do not maintain claiming that one of my motivations is the desire to put TkMan into debian's main pool? Are there any other reasons why I should not approach him? -- Shaul Karl [EMAIL PROTECTED] An elephant is a mouse with an operating system.