Fixed in lintian. Lintian will tag these files
Thanks On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 10:50 PM, Tobias Frost <t...@debian.org> wrote: > Am Montag, den 10.10.2016, 21:48 +0200 schrieb Bastien ROUCARIES: >> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Tobias Frost <t...@debian.org> >> wrote: >> > Dear Developers, >> > >> > while packaging an updated version of one of my packages which >> > included >> > now rapidjson I became aware that this library includes the test >> > suite >> > date of http://json.org/JSON_checker/. While there is no license on >> > the >> > testsuite.zip, json_checker is licensed by json.org with the >> > infamous >> > clause "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil." >> > and I believe the testdata is covered under the same license "best >> > case", (worst case not licensed at all. >> > >> > For rapidjson [1] I filed #840333, but afterwards I checked also >> > codesearch.debian.net for one of the testcases [2] and found many >> > packages including it verbatim. >> > >> > I'm not sure if my assessment is right and we have a DFSG problem >> > here, >> > but if so, I guess this should be handled by extending the existing >> > lintian error. >> >> >> With my lintian maint hat, they are here two approach: >> - autoreject based on md5sum and sha1 >> - autoreject based on regexp >> >> Do you have better signature than this file ? > > The testsuite data are in total 36 (mostly) small files, so I guess > the hashes would work, maybe with an additional indicator if more than > one file in the set is found. > > The zip is here: > http://json.org/JSON_checker/test.zip > a git repo for convenient browsing them here: > https://github.com/miloyip/rapidjson/tree/master/bin/jsonchecker > >> > >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > >> > [1] (where upstream is aware of it and later versions recommend to >> > remove the testsuite) >> > [1] https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=%22Extra+comma%22%3A+tru >> > e%2C >> > +path%3Afail9.json&perpkg=1 >> > >> > >> > -- >> > tobi >> > >> > -- > tobi
