Bug#840928: RFS on ITP: node-doctrine/1.5.0-1 -- JSDoc parser
Hi, On 18/10/2016 16:02, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: Hi Julien (note: this is probably for Upstream not Debian) I have seen the LICENSE.closure-compiler file, it is mentioned in README.md, but I didn't find any trace of it in the code. Same thing : there is a LICENSE.esprima, and they mention it in the README.md, but I have found nothing about it in the code. Should I still put something in d/copyright? But then which file should I point to? "some of functions is derived from *" lets ignore grammar, I guess this means "some of the functions in the source code, have been derived from foo/bar" so, you need to ask them which functions, or maybe release under FOO and BAR and FOOBAR licenses the whole package. I'm not sure, but copying files with a different copyright shouldn't be ignored, if you can't know which files have such licenses, my suggestion is to relicense the whole package. But as said, this is something for upstream. Upstream relicensed things under Apache-2.0 ; please see the new 2.0.0 upstream version, available both here: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/node-doctrine/node-doctrine_2.0.0-1.dsc and here: Vcs-Git: https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-javascript/node-doctrine.git Vcs-Browser: https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-doctrine.git I hope it's better this time, Snark on #debian-js
Bug#840928: RFS on ITP: node-doctrine/1.5.0-1 -- JSDoc parser
Hi, On 18/10/2016 16:02, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: Hi Julien (note: this is probably for Upstream not Debian) I have seen the LICENSE.closure-compiler file, it is mentioned in README.md, but I didn't find any trace of it in the code. Same thing : there is a LICENSE.esprima, and they mention it in the README.md, but I have found nothing about it in the code. Should I still put something in d/copyright? But then which file should I point to? "some of functions is derived from *" lets ignore grammar, I guess this means "some of the functions in the source code, have been derived from foo/bar" so, you need to ask them which functions, or maybe release under FOO and BAR and FOOBAR licenses the whole package. I'm not sure, but copying files with a different copyright shouldn't be ignored, if you can't know which files have such licenses, my suggestion is to relicense the whole package. But as said, this is something for upstream. G. This is now: https://github.com/eslint/doctrine/issues/176 Snark on #debian-js
Bug#840928: RFS on ITP: node-doctrine/1.5.0-1 -- JSDoc parser
Hi Julien (note: this is probably for Upstream not Debian) >I have seen the LICENSE.closure-compiler file, it is mentioned in >README.md, but I didn't find any trace of it in the code. >Same thing : there is a LICENSE.esprima, and they mention it in the >README.md, but I have found nothing about it in the code. > >Should I still put something in d/copyright? But then which file should >I point to? "some of functions is derived from *" lets ignore grammar, I guess this means "some of the functions in the source code, have been derived from foo/bar" so, you need to ask them which functions, or maybe release under FOO and BAR and FOOBAR licenses the whole package. I'm not sure, but copying files with a different copyright shouldn't be ignored, if you can't know which files have such licenses, my suggestion is to relicense the whole package. But as said, this is something for upstream. G.
Bug#840928: RFS on ITP: node-doctrine/1.5.0-1 -- JSDoc parser
On 18/10/2016 10:43, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: control: owner -1 ! control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "node-doctrine" some of extensions is derived from closure-compiler Apache License Version 2.0, January 2004 http://www.apache.org/licenses/ can you please clarify them? I have seen the LICENSE.closure-compiler file, it is mentioned in README.md, but I didn't find any trace of it in the code. also esprima please Same thing : there is a LICENSE.esprima, and they mention it in the README.md, but I have found nothing about it in the code. Should I still put something in d/copyright? But then which file should I point to? Snark on #debian-js
Bug#840928: RFS on ITP: node-doctrine/1.5.0-1 -- JSDoc parser
control: owner -1 ! control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi, > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "node-doctrine" some of extensions is derived from closure-compiler Apache License Version 2.0, January 2004 http://www.apache.org/licenses/ can you please clarify them? also esprima please thanks G.
Bug#840928: RFS on ITP: node-doctrine/1.5.0-1 -- JSDoc parser
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "node-doctrine" * Package name: node-doctrine Version : 1.5.0-1 Upstream Author : Usuke Suzuki and other contributors * URL : https://github.com/eslint/doctrine * License : BSD-2-clause Section : web It builds those binary packages: node-doctrine - JSDoc parser To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/node-doctrine Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/node-doctrine/node-doctrine_1.5.0-1.dsc It is packaged within the Debian Javascript Maintainers team: Vcs-Git: https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-javascript/node-doctrine.git Vcs-Browser: https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-javascript/node-doctrine.git Cheers, Snark on #debian-js
