Re: Has Copyright summarizing outlived its usefulness?

2017-12-07 Thread Simon McVittie
On Thu, 07 Dec 2017 at 13:33:12 +0800, Boyuan Yang wrote: > Of course if the > file is under a different license (different from th license of whole > project) > or some authors had their names written inside source code *explicitly*(e.g., > in the comment), it must be listed out in a separate

Re: ISO download difficult

2017-12-07 Thread Holger Levsen
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 03:45:38PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 2:58 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > I think that's probably true, but it also has prerequisites that may not > > be achievable. In other words, it's more user-friendly except when it's > > completely impossible (be

Bug#883771: ITP: openbmp -- BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) collector

2017-12-07 Thread Vincent Bernat
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Vincent Bernat -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 * Package name: openbmp Version : 0.13.0 Upstream Author : Cisco Systems, Inc. and others * URL : https://github.com/OpenBMP/openbmp * License : Eclipse Pr

Re: Has Copyright summarizing outlived its usefulness?

2017-12-07 Thread Jeremy Stanley
On 2017-12-06 23:12:19 -0600 (-0600), Steve Robbins wrote: [...] > Perhaps we should deprecate debian/copyright and just create > debian/license instead! [...] Free software licenses are, ultimately, licenses of copyright and so while the filename may seem mildly confusing, it is not entirely inco

Re: Has Copyright summarizing outlived its usefulness?

2017-12-07 Thread Ian Jackson
Simon McVittie writes ("Re: Has Copyright summarizing outlived its usefulness?"): > I've written about this before, for example in > , and I'd be > very glad to see an "official" response from the ftp team. >From what I've seen of the f

Bug#883825: ITP: golang-github-go-kit-kit -- Programming toolkit for microservices

2017-12-07 Thread Martin Ferrari
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Martín Ferrari * Package name: golang-github-go-kit-kit Version : 0.6.0 Upstream Author : Peter Bourgon * URL : https://github.com/go-kit/kit * License : Expat Programming Lang: Go Description : Programming toolki

Bug#883828: ITP: woff2 -- library for converting fonts to WOFF 2.0

2017-12-07 Thread Jeremy Bicha
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org Owner: jbi...@debian.org Package Name: woff2 Version: 1.0.2 Upstream Authors : Google License : Expat Programming Lang: C++ Homepage: https://github.com/google/woff2 Description: library for converting fonts to WOFF 2.0

Re: Has Copyright summarizing outlived its usefulness?

2017-12-07 Thread Ben Finney
Ian Jackson writes: > From what I've seen of the ftp review process, the file-by-file > information is invaluable to ftpmaster review. As in, the ftpmaster > review would probably be impractical without it. ftpmaster review > necessarily focuses on the contents of the source package. It is also

Work-needing packages report for Dec 8, 2017

2017-12-07 Thread wnpp
The following is a listing of packages for which help has been requested through the WNPP (Work-Needing and Prospective Packages) system in the last week. Total number of orphaned packages: 1180 (new: 3) Total number of packages offered up for adoption: 149 (new: 1) Total number of packages reques

Re: Has Copyright summarizing outlived its usefulness?

2017-12-07 Thread Markus Koschany
Am 30.11.2017 um 06:46 schrieb Steve Robbins: [...] > Has copyright summarizing outlived its usefulness for large sources? Why > shouldn't we have some way to say "Copyright by the Boost authors"? > I completely agree with your rationale and there is even more room for improvement because I don

Re: Has Copyright summarizing outlived its usefulness?

2017-12-07 Thread Wookey
On 2017-12-08 01:42 +0100, Markus Koschany wrote: > > Why don't we add all DFSG-free licenses to /usr/share/common-licenses or > /usr/share/free-licenses instead? I would second this. It seems odd that we only have a small subset in common-licences so I often end up finding/copying in a copy to t

Which files should go in ‘/usr/share/common-licenses/’? (was: Has Copyright summarizing outlived its usefulness?)

2017-12-07 Thread Ben Finney
Wookey writes: > On 2017-12-08 01:42 +0100, Markus Koschany wrote: > > Why don't we add all DFSG-free licenses to > > /usr/share/common-licenses or /usr/share/free-licenses instead? > > I would second this. It seems odd that we only have a small subset in > common-licences so I often end up findi

Re: Which files should go in ‘/usr/share/common-licenses/’?

2017-12-07 Thread Russ Allbery
Ben Finney writes: > So I think we should specifically ask the position of people who have > expertise maintaining machines with very small disk space: How to judge > which files should be unilaterally installed in that directory, in the > hope of saving not only the efforts of package maintainer