Hi! * George Danchev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060620 11:43]: > The bug #335278 is relatively easy, but has been neglected for quite > long > time. I sent a patch to bts and contacted maintainer, but got no feedback > after being waiting for a reasonable timeframe. Thus, I prepared a non-DD > NMU:
Im often to sponsor this NMU; squashing some rc bugs is always a good idea ;) But if I see it correclty, your patch doesn't deal with the following points mentioned in franks original bug report: > 1.2 debian/copyright: "This package has many utilities that are GPL > or close to GPL code." "close to GPL"??? > "The original source code was published on the Net by a group of > cypherpunks. I picked up a modified version from the news." > Quite a license... > 1.3 You claim that the copyright holder is Craig Small, but that's not > true, it's Francisco Rosales and "a group of cypherpunks" Yeah, I know... this copyright stuff is always boring. But important. Could you try to fix the copyright file, too? Yours sincerely, Alexander -- http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
