Re: dual licensed + build generated png (GPL-2+ or CC-BY-SA-4.0+)

Hello Paul, Thank you for answering, we managed to do a correct d/copyright and I just uploaded to NEW. -- Samuel Henrique

dual licensed + build generated png (GPL-2+ or CC-BY-SA-4.0+)

/hide-inactive.svg#L6 [3]https://salsa.debian.org/debian/adapta-gtk-theme/blob/6aa1f96171de5c8a3a45795c5153ade4e995a3fa/README.md#L355 [4]https://creativecommons.org/ns# Regards, -- Samuel Henrique

GPL2 + required to have the place to get the recent version

hing in d/copyright to address this. Are you aware of other software that are in a similar situation? I would like to see what d/copyright looks like. For this case the package was accepted by ftp-master with a d/copyright that states it as GPL-2. Regards, -- Samuel Henrique

Re: Nmap Public Source License Version 0.94 - Is it DFSG-compliant?

inclined to say that the license is DFSG-compliant. Does this change your mind, Hilko, or are you still in the same position? I'll try to get somebody else's opinion on this as well, maybe someone from the ftp-master team could help. [0] https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation -- Samuel Henrique

Re: Nmap Public Source License Version 0.94 - Is it DFSG-compliant?

someone who might not have context yet: yes, it might happen that we find out the current license we have in main is non-free, so this is not necessarily about the new one only. Some relevant comments here: https://github.com/nmap/nmap/issues/2199#issuecomment-787623648 https://github.com/nmap/nmap/issues/2199#issuecomment-787625270 https://github.com/nmap/nmap/issues/2199#issuecomment-787847234 -- Samuel Henrique

Nmap Public Source License Version 0.94 - Is it DFSG-compliant?

://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=972216 [3] https://nmap.org/npsl/npsl-annotated.html Regards, -- Samuel Henrique