Bug#884227: debian-policy: please add zlib to common licenses

Jonathan Nieder writes: > Markus Koschany wrote: >> License: zlib >> Source: https://opensource.org/licenses/Zlib >> Example packages: >> https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#The_zlib.2Flibpng_License_.28Zlib.29 > Hm. The license says > 3. This notice may not be removed

Bug#884226: debian-policy: please add EPL-1.0 to common licenses

Hi again, Markus Koschany wrote: > Let me try to explain it this way: Take src:ufoai-data or src:netbeans > for example. Both packages ship approximately a dozen different > licenses. I can't simply copy the upstream license because I have > to format it to make it copyright format 1.0

Bug#884223: debian-policy: please add AGPL-3.0 to common licenses

On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 19:59:15 +0100, Markus Koschany wrote: (Just as a side note, I'm in favour of adding more licenses to common-licenses): > Take a stopwatch, > find a plain-text version of this license on the internet, format the > file according to copyright format 1.0 and stop the time. %

Bug#884227: debian-policy: please add zlib to common licenses

Am 13.12.2017 um 19:21 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > Markus Koschany wrote: > >> License: zlib >> Source: https://opensource.org/licenses/Zlib >> Example packages: >> https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#The_zlib.2Flibpng_License_.28Zlib.29 > > Hm. The license says > > 3. This notice may not be

Bug#884223: debian-policy: please add AGPL-3.0 to common licenses

On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 07:59:15PM +0100, Markus Koschany wrote: > No, this is entirely about our most precious resources: time and human > beings > > You also have to format the license in such a way that it complies with > copyright format 1.0. For instance that means you have to put dots on >

Bug#884226: debian-policy: please add EPL-1.0 to common licenses

Am 13.12.2017 um 19:56 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > Hi, > > Markus Koschany wrote: > >> I would like to argue that disk space is no longer an issue in 2017 and >> people with special needs (embedded systems) will most likely remove >> /usr/share/common-licenses anyway. > > I agree: space on

Bug#884223: debian-policy: please add AGPL-3.0 to common licenses

Am 13.12.2017 um 19:40 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > Hi, > > Markus Koschany wrote: >> Am 13.12.2017 um 19:10 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: >>> Markus Koschany wrote: > License: AGPL-3.0 Source: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.de.html Example packages:

Bug#884226: debian-policy: please add EPL-1.0 to common licenses

Hi, Markus Koschany wrote: > I would like to argue that disk space is no longer an issue in 2017 and > people with special needs (embedded systems) will most likely remove > /usr/share/common-licenses anyway. I agree: space on installation media and network transfer time are more important than

Bug#884223: debian-policy: please add AGPL-3.0 to common licenses

Hi, Markus Koschany wrote: > Am 13.12.2017 um 19:10 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: >> Markus Koschany wrote: >>> License: AGPL-3.0 >>> Source: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.de.html >>> Example packages: >>> https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#GNU_AFFERO_GENERAL_PUBLIC_LICENSE_.28AGPL-3.29 >>

Bug#884226: debian-policy: please add EPL-1.0 to common licenses

Am 13.12.2017 um 19:18 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > Markus Koschany wrote: > >> as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG >> licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package >> maintainers are allowed to reference them. >> >> License: EPL-1.0 >>

Bug#884223: debian-policy: please add AGPL-3.0 to common licenses

Hi, Am 13.12.2017 um 19:10 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > Hi, > > Markus Koschany wrote: > >> as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG >> licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package >> maintainers are allowed to reference them. >> >> License:

Bug#884227: debian-policy: please add zlib to common licenses

Markus Koschany wrote: > License: zlib > Source: https://opensource.org/licenses/Zlib > Example packages: > https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#The_zlib.2Flibpng_License_.28Zlib.29 Hm. The license says 3. This notice may not be removed or altered from any source distribution. And part of

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Markus Koschany wrote: > as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG > licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package > maintainers are allowed to reference them. > > License: OFL-1.1 > Source: https://opensource.org/licenses/OFL-1.1 > Example

Bug#884226: debian-policy: please add EPL-1.0 to common licenses

Markus Koschany wrote: > as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG > licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package > maintainers are allowed to reference them. > > License: EPL-1.0 > Source: https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-v10.html > Example

Bug#884225: debian-policy: please add CC-BY-4.0 to common licenses

Markus Koschany wrote: > as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG > licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package > maintainers are allowed to reference them. > > License: CC-BY-4.0 > Source: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ > Example

Bug#884224: ebian-policy: please add CC-BY-3.0 to common licenses

Hi, Markus Koschany wrote: > as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG > licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package > maintainers are allowed to reference them. > > License: CC-BY-3.0 > Source: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ >

Bug#884223: debian-policy: please add AGPL-3.0 to common licenses

Hi, Markus Koschany wrote: > as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG > licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package > maintainers are allowed to reference them. > > License: AGPL-3.0 > Source: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.de.html >

Bug#786470: debian-policy: [copyright-format] Add an optional “License-Grant” field

On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 at 23:54:01 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 09:27:30AM +, Simon McVittie wrote: > > I think the License-Grant field is a useful addition to the format > > I strongly disagree with this. I think this adds more syntax without adding > any more

Bug#883950: debian-policy: allow specifying common licenses with only the identifier

Hello Sean, Am 13.12.2017 um 01:31 schrieb Sean Whitton: > Hello Markus, > > On Tue, Dec 12 2017, Markus Koschany wrote: > >> I agree that using boiler plate like this: >> >> | License: GPL-2+ >> | On Debian systems the full text of the GPL-2 can be found in >> |