Chris,
On 05/23/2014 11:16 PM, RJ Clay wrote:
On 05/01/2014 12:37 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
I just updated CPAN with a new release. Due to previous issues
regaridng version numbers, I had to go with 1.10.1
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 3:39 PM, RJ Clay <j...@rocasa.us
<mailto:j...@rocasa.us>> wrote:
On 04/25/2014 03:49 AM, Chris Travers wrote:
BSD license. We need to fix that. Thanks :-)
There's a similar issue with PGObject::Simple::Role, but in this
case it's the Makefile.PL that looks to have the wrong license
listed...
You took care of the issue regarding the License itself with your
release of version v1.10.01, but...
I'm sorry I didn't notice it before, but I found that it looks like
the Copyright year declaration in lib/PGObject/SImple/Role.pm still
only shows 2013 instead of getting updated to be 2013-2014...
There's more than way to take care of this for the package, of
course. Could simply wait until you have a chance to release a new
version that includes a change updating that year declaration. My only
concern there is that while I don't know for sure when it might be
required by a LedgerSMB package, I do think it's a good idea in any case
to have it as part of the next Debian stable release ("jessie"); the
freeze for which, IIRC, is in about 5 months.
Another possibility, especially if you don't plan a new release for
awhile; I could create a patch for the package that corrects that year
declaration and point to the origin of it as a ticket opened at it's
GitHub repo or at CPAN, or some other publically available verification
of the years, including a response to the ITP bug.
What you do think?
Robert James Clay
j...@rocasa.us
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/538f5913.1060...@rocasa.us
