Thanks for several responses -- however the underlying question I had,
whether the upload the new package to unstable or not, was not resolved.
Does anyone see any reason to delay or abstain from the upload? If not,
I'll do the upload within days.
/Simon
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Paul Wise p...@debian.org writes:
I would suggest asking the FSF licensing folks and debian-legal.
Good point about debian-legal, I'll repost the question there. I have
talked to the FSF and they suggest LGPLv3+ but will live with
dual-GPLv2+|LGPLv3+ if there are significant GPLv2-only
Florian Weimer f...@deneb.enyo.de writes:
* Simon Josefsson:
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+. I'd like to upload the latest version
into Debian before Wheezy since a pretty nasty inifinte-loop bug has
been fixed.
* Simon Josefsson:
It wouldn't hurt, but I'm also not sure if it is worth the work. If any
significant application triggered this particular code path, people
should have noticed the problem a long time ago. It is at worst an
easily diagnozed DoS causing the library to busy-loop forever.
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 20:35:53 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+.
So maybe that's a stupid question, but... Why? You didn't have enough
license headaches?
Cheers,
Julien
signature.asc
* Simon Josefsson:
Florian Weimer f...@deneb.enyo.de writes:
(GPLv2-only and LGPLv3+ are incompatible.)
Nowadays, almost all GPLv2-only programs link to library code licensed
under the GPLv3 (with a linking exception on the library side), so we
pretend that they are, at least to some
Florian Weimer f...@deneb.enyo.de writes:
(GPLv2-only and LGPLv3+ are incompatible.)
Nowadays, almost all GPLv2-only programs link to library code licensed
under the GPLv3 (with a linking exception on the library side), so we
pretend that they are, at least to some degree.
How does that
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 20:35:53 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+.
So maybe that's a stupid question, but... Why? You didn't have enough
license
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 21:03:25 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 20:35:53 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+.
So maybe
On 12-03-07 at 09:25pm, Julien Cristau wrote:
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 21:03:25 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
Julien Cristau jcris...@debian.org writes:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 20:35:53 +0100, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+. I'd like to upload the latest version
into Debian before Wheezy since a pretty nasty inifinte-loop bug has
been fixed. However, I am not certain what should be done before
uploading a
I would suggest asking the FSF licensing folks and debian-legal.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
* Simon Josefsson:
I co-maintain the libidn package. As upstream, I recently relicensed it
from LGPLv2+ to GPLv2+|LGPLv3+. I'd like to upload the latest version
into Debian before Wheezy since a pretty nasty inifinte-loop bug has
been fixed.
Should we get that into stable-security, under
13 matches
Mail list logo
