Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-30 Thread Philip Hands
David Starner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 04:32:08PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: Thomas Schoepf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 12:18:01PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: I'm packaging tkpgp, from munitions.vipul.net archive. The upstream

Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-30 Thread Raul Miller
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 10:08:39PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: Pseudonymes have been used throughout the history, so that's not a problem. For our protection, however, I'd recommend that you and tftp work out a agreement so that at least one Debian developer (you, for example) always

Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-30 Thread Raul Miller
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 08:46:38AM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 10:56:53PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: PGP is legally classified in the same category as atomic weapons. No, it's not. Atomic weapons are controlled by international treaties, and AFAIK it would

Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-30 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 08:50:40AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: Treaties are different from laws. On the contrary, ratified treaties are a binding part of the Finnish legislation, as if they were ordinary laws passed by the parliament. (IIRC) This may be different in the common law (sp?) system

Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-30 Thread Raul Miller
On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 07:23:53PM +0300, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote: On Thu, Sep 30, 1999 at 08:50:40AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: Treaties are different from laws. On the contrary, ratified treaties are a binding part of the Finnish legislation, as if they were ordinary laws passed by

Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-29 Thread Christian Surchi
I'm packaging tkpgp, from munitions.vipul.net archive. The upstream maintainer doesn't want reveal his real name and wants only tftp as name and an email address. The package is release under GPL. Is this possible? Thanks, Christian --- Christian Surchi, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-29 Thread Thomas Schoepf
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 12:18:01PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: I'm packaging tkpgp, from munitions.vipul.net archive. The upstream maintainer doesn't want reveal his real name and wants only tftp as name and an email address. The package is release under GPL. Is this possible? The

Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-29 Thread Philip Hands
Thomas Schoepf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: [1 text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)] On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 12:18:01PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: I'm packaging tkpgp, from munitions.vipul.net archive. The upstream maintainer doesn't want reveal his real name and wants only tftp as

Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-29 Thread David Starner
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 04:32:08PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: Thomas Schoepf [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 12:18:01PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: I'm packaging tkpgp, from munitions.vipul.net archive. The upstream maintainer doesn't want reveal his real name and

Re: Can I have a package with no real name of upstream maintainer?

1999-09-29 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 12:18:01PM +0200, Christian Surchi wrote: I'm packaging tkpgp, from munitions.vipul.net archive. The upstream maintainer doesn't want reveal his real name and wants only tftp as name and an email address. The package is release under GPL. Is this possible?