Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
I updated all *-colors packages last night with the updated AUTHORS files that clearly specify the license. I also added the ChangeLog file that was missing in Shiki-Colors. Sorry that it took a few days for the update, but my dad is currently in the hospital. Is there any pending change that needs to be added to the packages?
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
* Dmitrijs Ledkovs dmitrij.led...@gmail.com [090605 20:01]: 2009/6/5 Bernhard R. Link brl...@debian.org: * Dmitrijs Ledkovs dmitrij.led...@gmail.com [090605 14:01]: I've asked multiple times and not yet got a single argument why I herby place this and that in the public domain could see any danger to be misunderstood or invalidated by a German court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain#Rule_of_the_shorter_term Sorry no better source. Only thing I can find there is that the years after authors death is the same without looking where the author lived. And it also says that the USA has the same behaviour in this regard. I doubt we will find useable software anytime soon where the software is in the public domain because the author is many decades dead, but I was speaking about people giving up their copyrights. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link However, some countries make exceptions to this rule. A notorious case is Germany, which has had a bilateral treaty with the U.S. governing copyright since January 15, 1892. That treaty, which is still in effect, defined that a U.S. work was copyrighted in Germany according to German law irrespective of the work's copyright status in the U.S, and it did not contain a rule of the shorter term. In one case, a German court therefore decided that a U.S. work that had fallen into the public domain in the U.S. was still copyrighted in Germany in 2003 in spite of §7(1) of the EU directive. Good enough for me. To say what? All this says, especially with the context you omitted, that a work will not enter public domain N years after death of the author for N the value from the authors home country but only when the number of years by German law are reached. And given the list also linked on that page, that is true for many countries, including the US. If I misread anything, please tell me. But there is nothing at all saying that a I place this work in the public domain would have any more problems in Germany than in the US. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
2009/6/6 Bernhard R. Link brl...@debian.org: To say what? All this says, especially with the context you omitted, that a work will not enter public domain N years after death of the author for N the value from the authors home country but only when the number of years by German law are reached. And given the list also linked on that page, that is true for many countries, including the US. If I misread anything, please tell me. But there is nothing at all saying that a I place this work in the public domain would have any more problems in Germany than in the US. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link Ok, sorry, I did missunderstood this. -- With best regards Dmitrijs Ledkovs (for short Dima), Ледков Дмитрий Юрьевич -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 01:59:30AM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 23:10 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: Evgeni, ending the mail-flood for now and hating the fact that PD does not exist in Germany as it does in US etc. It's sad, that public domain does not exists in Germany, but we can use e.g. CC0 [1] license instead or we could write our own license like You can do what you want with this code. Thread it like it would be under public domain. Yeah, sure, CC0 exists, but compare the line I hereby put this workk in the public domain with the full license text of CC0, it's just braindead that we need such Krücken (hell, what's the english world for this? crutch?) to make something uncopyrighted. Anyways, we're getting offtopic here. Mutt, please serve the next mail please :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
On Fri, Jun 05, 2009 at 02:14:38AM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote: I'll try to make a list of all the icons if necessary, but it seems like that will take a long time to manually go through all of them. Evgeni, your opinion? I think, it would be nice, but not necessary. Didn't I wrote it before? If you have the extra time and do it, you get an extra beer, if not, well, I can live without it, and ftp-masters decide if they do too. Evgeni, can you have a look at the debian/copyright files in bazaar repository if I missed something? http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/arc-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/gnome-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/shiki-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright Looks fine, at least from my pov :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Am Freitag, den 05.06.2009, 08:27 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: Evgeni, can you have a look at the debian/copyright files in bazaar repository if I missed something? http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/arc-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/gnome-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/shiki-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright Looks fine, at least from my pov :) Ok, then here are the links to the updated packages: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/arc-colors/arc-colors_1.7.1-1.dsc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnome-colors/gnome-colors_3.8.6-1.dsc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/shiki-colors-murrine/shiki-colors-murrine_3.9.1-1.dsc Cheers, Benjamin signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
* Benjamin Drung benjamin.dr...@gmail.com [090605 01:59]: It's sad, that public domain does not exists in Germany In the same sense public domain does not exist in Germany, copyright does not exist in Germany either. I've asked multiple times and not yet got a single argument why I herby place this and that in the public domain could see any danger to be misunderstood or invalidated by a German court. There are many problems with public domain, but those are unrelated with Germany. (Like people thinking if it is public domain in the USA because of being written by a government employee or author long enough dead would allow people to use it outside of the USA; or people not claiming something they got as 'freeware' was public domain.). Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
2009/6/5 Bernhard R. Link brl...@debian.org: * Benjamin Drung benjamin.dr...@gmail.com [090605 01:59]: It's sad, that public domain does not exists in Germany In the same sense public domain does not exist in Germany, copyright does not exist in Germany either. I've asked multiple times and not yet got a single argument why I herby place this and that in the public domain could see any danger to be misunderstood or invalidated by a German court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain#Rule_of_the_shorter_term Sorry no better source. I quite like German Copyright Law even though it's a bit of a pain for the US originated open-source public domain stuff. -- With best regards Dmitrijs Ledkovs (for short Dima), Ледков Дмитрий Юрьевич -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
* Dmitrijs Ledkovs dmitrij.led...@gmail.com [090605 14:01]: I've asked multiple times and not yet got a single argument why I herby place this and that in the public domain could see any danger to be misunderstood or invalidated by a German court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain#Rule_of_the_shorter_term Sorry no better source. Only thing I can find there is that the years after authors death is the same without looking where the author lived. And it also says that the USA has the same behaviour in this regard. I doubt we will find useable software anytime soon where the software is in the public domain because the author is many decades dead, but I was speaking about people giving up their copyrights. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
2009/6/5 Bernhard R. Link brl...@debian.org: * Dmitrijs Ledkovs dmitrij.led...@gmail.com [090605 14:01]: I've asked multiple times and not yet got a single argument why I herby place this and that in the public domain could see any danger to be misunderstood or invalidated by a German court. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain#Rule_of_the_shorter_term Sorry no better source. Only thing I can find there is that the years after authors death is the same without looking where the author lived. And it also says that the USA has the same behaviour in this regard. I doubt we will find useable software anytime soon where the software is in the public domain because the author is many decades dead, but I was speaking about people giving up their copyrights. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link However, some countries make exceptions to this rule. A notorious case is Germany, which has had a bilateral treaty with the U.S. governing copyright since January 15, 1892. That treaty, which is still in effect, defined that a U.S. work was copyrighted in Germany according to German law irrespective of the work's copyright status in the U.S, and it did not contain a rule of the shorter term. In one case, a German court therefore decided that a U.S. work that had fallen into the public domain in the U.S. was still copyrighted in Germany in 2003 in spite of §7(1) of the EU directive. Good enough for me. -- With best regards Dmitrijs Ledkovs (for short Dima), Ледков Дмитрий Юрьевич -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Am Freitag, den 05.06.2009, 13:11 +0200 schrieb Benjamin Drung: Am Freitag, den 05.06.2009, 08:27 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: Evgeni, can you have a look at the debian/copyright files in bazaar repository if I missed something? http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/arc-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/gnome-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/shiki-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright Looks fine, at least from my pov :) Ok, then here are the links to the updated packages: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/arc-colors/arc-colors_1.7.1-1.dsc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnome-colors/gnome-colors_3.8.6-1.dsc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/shiki-colors-murrine/shiki-colors-murrine_3.9.1-1.dsc The packages were updated again (Maintainer is now GNOME-Colors Packagers). The locations of the dsc files are the same as posted above. Cheers, Benjamin signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
On Fri, 29 May 2009 14:31:38 +0200 Benjamin Drung wrote: I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Okay, Dima was right, thursday, not tuesday :) But here comes my review, very cosmetic: arc-colors-1.7.1/debian/copyright: + You miss © everywhere. + Please write an own Copyright: line for every copyright owner. + Do you have years of copyright and mail-addresses for Daniel P. Fore and Nuno Pinheiro? And maybe you can list the files copyrighted by them? + COPYING says GPL-2+, you write GPL-2 for upstreams code? shiki-colors-murrine-3.9.1/debian/copyright: + You miss © everywhere. + Please write an own Copyright: line for every copyright owner. + COPYING says GPL-3+, you write GPL-3 for upstreams code? shiki-colors-murrine-3.9.1/debian/control: + Package: shiki-colors-xfwm-theme should be section xfce? gnome-colors-3.8.5/debian/copyright: + You miss © everywhere. + Please write an own Copyright: line for every copyright owner. + COPYING says GPL-2+, you write GPL-2 for upstreams code? + Do you have years of copyright for the other contributors? And maybe you can list the files copyrighted by them? As they do not have copyright over ALL files as listed at the moment. + Files: Tango based icons, can you list them? Files: should be a shell-glob/regular expression/whatever (*machine* readable :)) + X-Comment: See AUTHORS file for more information on icon sources. All copyright information should be in debian/copyright, and you have it imho... so the line is not needed. For the GPL-X+ vs GPL-X issue, I guess it's just a matter of correct documentation. Maybe upstream should write something like This is licensed under GPL version X, see the full text of the license in COPYING into AUTHORS? Besides of these, I'm fine with an upload. So waiting for your fixes :) -- Bruce Schneier Fact Number 854: 'NP' means 'No Problem' if you are Bruce Schneier. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 13:18 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: On Fri, 29 May 2009 14:31:38 +0200 Benjamin Drung wrote: I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Okay, Dima was right, thursday, not tuesday :) But here comes my review, very cosmetic: arc-colors-1.7.1/debian/copyright: + You miss © everywhere. + Please write an own Copyright: line for every copyright owner. Both are changed in current DEP 5 proposal [1]. I will update the copyright header section to reflect it. + Do you have years of copyright and mail-addresses for Daniel P. Fore and Nuno Pinheiro? And maybe you can list the files copyrighted by them? I searched for the email addresses, but I do not found one. Victor, do you have the email addresses? + COPYING says GPL-2+, you write GPL-2 for upstreams code? COPYING only says, that it is GPL-2. It does not specify if it is v2 only or v2 or later. So we should assume v2 only. shiki-colors-murrine-3.9.1/debian/copyright: + You miss © everywhere. + Please write an own Copyright: line for every copyright owner. Same as in arc-colors. + COPYING says GPL-3+, you write GPL-3 for upstreams code? COPYING only says, that it is GPL-3. It does not specify if it is v3 only or v3 or later. Victor, do you allow later versions of GPL? shiki-colors-murrine-3.9.1/debian/control: + Package: shiki-colors-xfwm-theme should be section xfce? Yes, I will change it. gnome-colors-3.8.5/debian/copyright: + You miss © everywhere. + Please write an own Copyright: line for every copyright owner. Same as in arc-colors. + COPYING says GPL-2+, you write GPL-2 for upstreams code? Same as in arc-colors. + Do you have years of copyright for the other contributors? They are copied from gnome-icon-theme. I will add 2002-2008 to all of them. And maybe you can list the files copyrighted by them? As they do not have copyright over ALL files as listed at the moment. I do not know if it is possible. Victor, do you know, which files are based on gnome-icon-theme files? + Files: Tango based icons, can you list them? Files: should be a shell-glob/regular expression/whatever (*machine* readable :)) Same again. Victor, can you list them? + X-Comment: See AUTHORS file for more information on icon sources. All copyright information should be in debian/copyright, and you have it imho... so the line is not needed. Ok, I will remove it. For the GPL-X+ vs GPL-X issue, I guess it's just a matter of correct documentation. Maybe upstream should write something like This is licensed under GPL version X, see the full text of the license in COPYING into AUTHORS? This sounds good. Only shiki-colors can be licensed under GPL-3 or GPL-3 +. The other packages must be GPL-2 only, because they are based on packages which are either GPL-2 only or it is unclear if later versions are allowed. Victor, can you add these information to the AUTHORS file? Either use one sentence like This package is licensed under GNU General Public License version 3, or (at your option) any later version. or (better) use the three paragraphs template shown at the end of the license under How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs. Besides of these, I'm fine with an upload. So waiting for your fixes :) Nice to hear^Wread. Cheers, Benjamin [1] http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/ signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Benjamin Drung benjamin.dr...@gmail.com wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 13:18 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: + Do you have years of copyright for the other contributors? They are copied from gnome-icon-theme. I will add 2002-2008 to all of them. I actually email the upstream maintainers for gnome-icon-theme about this issue. It seems that Benjamin was dropped from the CC in their reply. Essentially, we'd have to dig through the VCS for the years, although some might have the year in the SVG metadata. Rodney Dawes wrote: you'll have to look at the revision control history to determine years, though the committer name may not necessarily be who authored the file. However, the theme is also being re-done in all high-res SVG, and so at some point, all this should be much clearer. I suppose the real question is whether or not including the copyright year is a MUST or SHOULD. As Benjamin notes, gnome-icon-theme is already in Debian and does not include the years in their debian/copyright. And maybe you can list the files copyrighted by them? As they do not have copyright over ALL files as listed at the moment. I do not know if it is possible. Victor, do you know, which files are based on gnome-icon-theme files? This would be best, but as the icons are mixed (some used directly while others are modified) it could be troublesome. The way we've done it for now seems to be very common through out Debian and upstream packages. Many packages list copyright holders that don't have copyright for every file all together if they use the same license. Just one example off the top of my head is awn-extra-applets. I'm listed in a bulk Copyright list, but I'm only the author of one applet out of many. + Files: Tango based icons, can you list them? Files: should be a shell-glob/regular expression/whatever (*machine* readable :)) Same again. Victor, can you list them? Again, that would be best. But if this proves problematic, would simply removing this section be acceptable, since putting them in the public domain explicitly gives up copyright? Implying that we are relicensing them in Debian? Besides of these, I'm fine with an upload. So waiting for your fixes :) Thanks so much for the review! (I hope I don't come off like I'm complaining, just trying to navigated the sometimes subjective world of the debian/copyright file.) - Andrew Starr-Bochicchio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
I searched for the email addresses, but I do not found one. Victor, do you have the email addresses? These are the addresses I found for both of them, after some googling: Daniel P. Fore: daniel.p.f...@gmail.com Nuno Pinheiro: n...@oxygen-icons.org For Arc-Colors, nuno designed the KDE4 login screen, on which the wallpapers are based on. Daniel P. Fore did the original xml file and textboxes, which was then heavily modified to suit Arc-Colors. For the GNOME-Colors, almost all of them are indeed from Tango/GNOME sources. Many of the new icons were also created by simply combining these sources, and many of the old icons have been replaced by their gnome-icon-theme's new one-canvas counterpart in recent versions. There are about 10-13 icons in total (plus about 10 more which are derived from these, and their duplicates in in each set), for which the 48px scalable files are based on Elementary icons by Daniel P. Fore. The smaller files were made by me, since Elementary did not have those sizes at the time gnome-colors was created. I'll try to make a list of all the icons if necessary, but it seems like that will take a long time to manually go through all of them. BTW, is the Shiki package the only one that needs This package is licensed under GNU General Public License version 3, or any later version., or should the other packages have similar lines be added to their AUTHORS files?
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 15:23 -0400 schrieb Andrew SB: On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Benjamin Drung benjamin.dr...@gmail.com wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 13:18 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: + Do you have years of copyright for the other contributors? They are copied from gnome-icon-theme. I will add 2002-2008 to all of them. I actually email the upstream maintainers for gnome-icon-theme about this issue. It seems that Benjamin was dropped from the CC in their reply. Essentially, we'd have to dig through the VCS for the years, although some might have the year in the SVG metadata. Rodney Dawes wrote: you'll have to look at the revision control history to determine years, though the committer name may not necessarily be who authored the file. However, the theme is also being re-done in all high-res SVG, and so at some point, all this should be much clearer. I suppose the real question is whether or not including the copyright year is a MUST or SHOULD. As Benjamin notes, gnome-icon-theme is already in Debian and does not include the years in their debian/copyright. The Ubuntu package does not list years, but the Debian package does: http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/g/gnome-icon-theme/current/copyright And maybe you can list the files copyrighted by them? As they do not have copyright over ALL files as listed at the moment. I do not know if it is possible. Victor, do you know, which files are based on gnome-icon-theme files? This would be best, but as the icons are mixed (some used directly while others are modified) it could be troublesome. The way we've done it for now seems to be very common through out Debian and upstream packages. Many packages list copyright holders that don't have copyright for every file all together if they use the same license. Just one example off the top of my head is awn-extra-applets. I'm listed in a bulk Copyright list, but I'm only the author of one applet out of many. Like Victor wrote, almost all of the icons are derived from Tango/GNOME sources. So we do not have to list them separately. + Files: Tango based icons, can you list them? Files: should be a shell-glob/regular expression/whatever (*machine* readable :)) Same again. Victor, can you list them? Again, that would be best. But if this proves problematic, would simply removing this section be acceptable, since putting them in the public domain explicitly gives up copyright? Implying that we are relicensing them in Debian? Yes, public domain gives up the copyright. You can do what you want with it, including relicensing. So we can drop it. Evgeni, do you agree? Cheers, Benjamin signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 20:42:54 +0200 Benjamin Drung wrote: Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 13:18 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: On Fri, 29 May 2009 14:31:38 +0200 Benjamin Drung wrote: I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Okay, Dima was right, thursday, not tuesday :) But here comes my review, very cosmetic: arc-colors-1.7.1/debian/copyright: + You miss © everywhere. + Please write an own Copyright: line for every copyright owner. Both are changed in current DEP 5 proposal [1]. I will update the copyright header section to reflect it. Great. I'm again living on the moon. Your point :) + Do you have years of copyright and mail-addresses for Daniel P. Fore and Nuno Pinheiro? And maybe you can list the files copyrighted by them? I searched for the email addresses, but I do not found one. Victor, do you have the email addresses? + COPYING says GPL-2+, you write GPL-2 for upstreams code? COPYING only says, that it is GPL-2. It does not specify if it is v2 only or v2 or later. So we should assume v2 only. COPYING is a pure copy of the GPL v2, which also includes the stanza one should copy to the source files: [...] This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. [...] That's why I'm asking. We have no headers in the files that reproduce this (or the no-at your option version). COPYING only says, that it is GPL-3. It does not specify if it is v3 only or v3 or later. Victor, do you allow later versions of GPL? Same here. shiki-colors-murrine-3.9.1/debian/control: + Package: shiki-colors-xfwm-theme should be section xfce? Yes, I will change it. Thanks. Regards (will reply to the other mails separatelly) Evgeni -- Bruce Schneier Fact Number 188: Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle doesn't protect your qubits from Bruce Schneier. Bruce knows with certainty. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 22:40 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: + COPYING says GPL-2+, you write GPL-2 for upstreams code? COPYING only says, that it is GPL-2. It does not specify if it is v2 only or v2 or later. So we should assume v2 only. COPYING is a pure copy of the GPL v2, which also includes the stanza one should copy to the source files: [...] This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version. [...] That's why I'm asking. We have no headers in the files that reproduce this (or the no-at your option version). The pure copy of the GPL-2 means, that it is licensed under GPL-2. This paragraph is a recommendation. The main copyright rule: If you are unsure, assume the worst case. Cheers, Benjamin signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:23:59 -0400 Andrew SB wrote: I suppose the real question is whether or not including the copyright year is a MUST or SHOULD. As Benjamin notes, gnome-icon-theme is already in Debian and does not include the years in their debian/copyright. It's a should as far as I know. And maybe you can list the files copyrighted by them? As they do not have copyright over ALL files as listed at the moment. I do not know if it is possible. Victor, do you know, which files are based on gnome-icon-theme files? This would be best, but as the icons are mixed (some used directly while others are modified) it could be troublesome. The way we've done it for now seems to be very common through out Debian and upstream packages. Many packages list copyright holders that don't have copyright for every file all together if they use the same license. Just one example off the top of my head is awn-extra-applets. I'm listed in a bulk Copyright list, but I'm only the author of one applet out of many. I know this works, and I do this too sometimes (esp when headers say the foobar team), but if it is possible (without a real huge workload), a detailed list would be nice :) + Files: Tango based icons, can you list them? Files: should be a shell-glob/regular expression/whatever (*machine* readable :)) Same again. Victor, can you list them? Again, that would be best. But if this proves problematic, would simply removing this section be acceptable, since putting them in the public domain explicitly gives up copyright? Implying that we are relicensing them in Debian? Yeah, would work too. One could even say Victor relicensed them, as he sells them in a tarball, saying GPL ontop :) (I hope I don't come off like I'm complaining, just trying to navigated the sometimes subjective world of the debian/copyright file.) Not at all, debian/copyright can be a hell, and here we have really low trouble, but when you see some other obscure licenses, one might think: go away, I wont package this, you must be crazy. But as this is not the case here, we should't rant but upload soon :) -- Bruce Schneier Fact Number 1016: Bruce Schneier can guarantee fair exchange without trusted third parties. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
On Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:37:58 -0400 Victor Castillejo wrote: I'll try to make a list of all the icons if necessary, but it seems like that will take a long time to manually go through all of them. More a nicehave here, I think. Others may think different... BTW, is the Shiki package the only one that needs This package is licensed under GNU General Public License version 3, or any later version., or should the other packages have similar lines be added to their AUTHORS files? For all please. This makes life much easier :) Thanks Evgeni -- Bruce Schneier Fact Number 860: When you email Bruce Schneier, you don't need to press send. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 22:13:02 +0200 Benjamin Drung wrote: Again, that would be best. But if this proves problematic, would simply removing this section be acceptable, since putting them in the public domain explicitly gives up copyright? Implying that we are relicensing them in Debian? Yes, public domain gives up the copyright. You can do what you want with it, including relicensing. So we can drop it. Evgeni, do you agree? We can, yes. I'd prolly write: Files: * Copyright: Victor License: GPL... [...]GPL short version[...] . Most of the icons derived from the Tango Icon Theme which is in the public domain and were relicensed under the GPL for the gnome-colors project. See [link]. Regards Evgeni, ending the mail-flood for now and hating the fact that PD does not exist in Germany as it does in US etc. -- Bruce Schneier Fact Number 827: There are no composite numbers. Only prime numbers Bruce has broken into smaller pieces. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 23:10 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: Evgeni, ending the mail-flood for now and hating the fact that PD does not exist in Germany as it does in US etc. It's sad, that public domain does not exists in Germany, but we can use e.g. CC0 [1] license instead or we could write our own license like You can do what you want with this code. Thread it like it would be under public domain. Cheers, Benjamin [1] http://creativecommons.org/license/zero/ signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2009, 15:37 -0400 schrieb Victor Castillejo: For Arc-Colors, nuno designed the KDE4 login screen, on which the wallpapers are based on. Daniel P. Fore did the original xml file and textboxes, which was then heavily modified to suit Arc-Colors. For nuno Arc-*.png would be the correct pattern? Which files are the textboxes? It looks like all files (except the wallpapers) are derived from Daniel P. Fore. Is that right? For the GNOME-Colors, almost all of them are indeed from Tango/GNOME sources. Many of the new icons were also created by simply combining these sources, and many of the old icons have been replaced by their gnome-icon-theme's new one-canvas counterpart in recent versions. There are about 10-13 icons in total (plus about 10 more which are derived from these, and their duplicates in in each set), for which the 48px scalable files are based on Elementary icons by Daniel P. Fore. The smaller files were made by me, since Elementary did not have those sizes at the time gnome-colors was created. I'll try to make a list of all the icons if necessary, but it seems like that will take a long time to manually go through all of them. Evgeni, your opinion? I think, it would be nice, but not necessary. BTW, is the Shiki package the only one that needs This package is licensed under GNU General Public License version 3, or any later version., or should the other packages have similar lines be added to their AUTHORS files? Like Evgeni already wrote, all packages should have such a line in the authors file (gnome-colors and arc-colors can only be GPL version 2 without or any later version). Evgeni, can you have a look at the debian/copyright files in bazaar repository if I missed something? http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/arc-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/gnome-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gnome-colors-packagers/shiki-colors-pkg/debian/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright So long for today, Benjamin signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Hi, there is again a new upstream release of gnome-colors. Here is the .dsc file for the updated package: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnome-colors/gnome-colors_3.8.5-1.dsc Cheers, Benjamin signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Hi, upstream released a version 3.8.4 of gnome-colors. Here is the .dsc file for the updated package: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnome-colors/gnome-colors_3.8.4-1.dsc Cheers, Benjamin signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Hi Benjamin, On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 02:31:38PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote: all license issues are resolved now. Some problematic files (e.g. CC-BY-NC-3.0 licensed) were replaced. Upstream was very helpful with all these issues. Great! Here are the links to the .dsc files for the new packages: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/arc-colors/arc-colors_1.7.1-1.dsc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnome-colors/gnome-colors_3.8.3-1.dsc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/shiki-colors-murrine/shiki-colors-murrine_3.9.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I'll have a look at these the next days (prolly not before thuesday though). As the old packages were in a very good shape, I'm quite sure I'll be able to upload this versions after I checked the copyright stuff. BTW, is there no more shiki-colors package? only -murrine? Regards Evgeni signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Hi Evgeni (Privet) 2009/5/29 Evgeni Golov sarge...@die-welt.net: Hi Benjamin, On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 02:31:38PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote: I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I'll have a look at these the next days (prolly not before thuesday though). So is that Tuesday or Thursday?? =D As the old packages were in a very good shape, I'm quite sure I'll be able to upload this versions after I checked the copyright stuff. BTW, is there no more shiki-colors package? only -murrine? Regards Evgeni -- With best regards Dmitrijs Ledkovs (for short Dima), Ледков Дмитрий Юрьевич -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Am Freitag, den 29.05.2009, 16:23 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: Hi Benjamin, On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 02:31:38PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote: all license issues are resolved now. Some problematic files (e.g. CC-BY-NC-3.0 licensed) were replaced. Upstream was very helpful with all these issues. Great! Here are the links to the .dsc files for the new packages: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/a/arc-colors/arc-colors_1.7.1-1.dsc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnome-colors/gnome-colors_3.8.3-1.dsc http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/shiki-colors-murrine/shiki-colors-murrine_3.9.1-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. I'll have a look at these the next days (prolly not before thuesday though). As the old packages were in a very good shape, I'm quite sure I'll be able to upload this versions after I checked the copyright stuff. BTW, is there no more shiki-colors package? only -murrine? shiki-colors-murrine is the Murrine version and shiki-colors is the Clearlooks version. Murrine is faster and recommended for everyone who has Murrine 0.90.3 or newer. So yes, shiki-colors is replaced by shiki-colors-murrine. Cheers, Benjamin signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Privet Dima! On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 03:45:11PM +0100, Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote: I'll have a look at these the next days (prolly not before thuesday though). So is that Tuesday or Thursday?? =D Bleh, got me. Never write mails while doing important work :) I meant tuesday, the day after monday ;) Regards Evgeni signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 05:06:17PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote: BTW, is there no more shiki-colors package? only -murrine? shiki-colors-murrine is the Murrine version and shiki-colors is the Clearlooks version. Murrine is faster and recommended for everyone who has Murrine 0.90.3 or newer. So yes, shiki-colors is replaced by shiki-colors-murrine. Ok, good to know. I think you've correctly retitled the ITP etc? :) Regards signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: ITS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors are ready
Am Freitag, den 29.05.2009, 22:14 +0200 schrieb Evgeni Golov: On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 05:06:17PM +0200, Benjamin Drung wrote: BTW, is there no more shiki-colors package? only -murrine? shiki-colors-murrine is the Murrine version and shiki-colors is the Clearlooks version. Murrine is faster and recommended for everyone who has Murrine 0.90.3 or newer. So yes, shiki-colors is replaced by shiki-colors-murrine. Ok, good to know. I think you've correctly retitled the ITP etc? :) No, we forgot this. But Andrew has now retitled the ITP. Cheers, Benjamin signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
