Well; you are right Patrick; perhaps I should do something to awake
debcheckroot from its slumber! If I am not the one who can build a
respective infrastructure around the project (i.e. checksums for all
Debian packages) and develop the code forth then someone else would do
it as there seems to be sufficient interest in the project.
The first step towards doing so would be to give debcheckroot a
correct license. I have been thinking of C-FSL-v0.9->1.0, a license we
would have to discuss on debian-legal, first. I would really like to
have a universal license that fits all of my projects, first. If there
should in deed be a non-refittable problem with it I am ready to retract
it in favour of a BSD-like license (however for debcheckroot, only).
Am 2016-05-18 um 17:29 schrieb Patrick Schleizer:
Elmar Stellnberger:
Here is a wishlist of mine:
- put your code in git source code management
That would be a good starting point. Nonetheless I would like to keep
the git repository hosted somewhere on my own page (currently:
https://www.elstel.org/debcheckroot) as it already is in support of
DNSSEC/DANE. Furthermore someone would have to assist me in setting up
write access for such a git-repository (up to now I have only been using
git offline). Perhaps something to discuss on another debian mailing list.
- create a debcheckroot Debian package
... that was already done some time ago; though the license had hampered
approval of the package.
- upload that Debian package to official Debian repository (that would
simplify creation of a Live DVD or Live USB with debcheckroot a lot; and
get debcheckroot from a safer location; helps with publicity)
- doesn't debcheckroot perfectly fit with the Debian reproducible team?
They might be interested in to help with packaging and sponsoring
upload. Please consider getting in touch with them.
Thx for the reference; I will look for them as soon as the licensing and
the issue about a secure git repository would be resolved.
Cheers,
Patrick
