❦ 24 novembre 2017 21:25 +0100, Nicolas Braud-Santoni <nico...@braud-santoni.eu> :
>> Any MBF should be discussed first on debian-devel@ first. For me, >> this seems a small violation and it would be preferable to stick with >> severity normal to not appear too agressive. > > Only 8 source packages are concerned (re: not shipping the CC0 text), > so I didn't realise that constituted a MBF. > > Thanks for the advise on the severity, I was under the impression that all > policy violations should be `serious` or greater. How should I > proceed? For 8 packages, you can file the bug directly. As for severity, people may not agree with the interpretation of the policy: CC0 is equivalent to public domain and the license text is very verbose. It would be easier to push the change without a "threatening" severity. >> > Thanks a bunch for the review, >> >> Looks good. Tell me what you want to do about the remaining lintian >> warning. > > If that's fine by you, I would rather have it uploaded as-is. So, it's uploaded. -- Debian package sponsoring guidelines: https://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
