On Thu, 2024-07-25 at 09:55 +0200, Marc Leeman wrote:
> > A few to look at and verify.
> > 
> > AGPL-3+         | BSL-1.0          openvpn3-core/deps/vcpkg-
> > ports/asio/vcpkg.json
> > AGPL-3+         | GPL-3            openvpn3-
> > core/openvpn/asio/asioresolverres.hpp
> > AGPL-3+         | Unicode-DFS-2015 openvpn3-core/openvpn/common/unicode-
> > impl.hpp
> > AGPL-3+         | GPL-3            openvpn3-
> > core/openvpn/crypto/tls_crypt_v2.hpp
> > AGPL-3+         | GPL-3            openvpn3-
> > core/openvpn/mbedtls/util/pem.hpp
> > AGPL-3+         | APSL-2.0 and/or BSD-4-Clause-UC openvpn3-
> > core/openvpn/netconf/ios/net-route.h
> > AGPL-3+         | GPL-3            openvpn3-
> > core/openvpn/openssl/util/pem.hpp
> 
> To be honest, I'm at an end with the licences and about ready to throw
> in the towel, every time there is a review, there is a vague remark
> that there is an issue with the licences and to be honest, I have no
> clue what the real problem is. What is wrong. The dual licences, the
> 'conflicts' some ppl point me to?
> 
> A lot of work has been put in the licences already and I am not
> certain that the automated tools can pick out the issues and solutions
> and every time someone reviews, there is a new remark on the licences.
> 
> What frustrates me about this is that, if you ask feedback from 2
> people, you get 3 different answers.

I gave you an edited list of files to review as thrown up by 'lrc', I could
have copy and pasted the whole output.

I checked a couple of the files and indeed the licensing was at odds. Not my
job to go through them all.

> 
> > 4. Watch file (uscan --force-download):
> There is no indexable location to download the sources (something I
> passed along to upstream and they might consider for subsequent
> release) and even then, this is a dfsg package; I can't use it without
> repackaging at least part of the code.

Apologies, I should have entered 'N/A' here. No issue was raised, so no harm,
no foul.

> 
> > Additional...
> > 
> > A. Please update 'Standards-Version' in 'debian/control' to 4.7.0 as per
> > Debian policy[5].
> 
> That is not really a problem.

This is a new package wanting to get into Debian. It must meet the Debian
policy of the time whic is 4.7.0.

Regards

Phil

-- 
"I play the game for the game’s own sake"

Arthur Conan Doyle - The Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans

--

Internet Relay Chat (IRC): kathenas

Website: https://kathenas.org

Instagram: https://instagram.com/kathenasorg/

Buy Me A Coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/kathenasorg

--

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to