On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:41:14 +0100 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Francesco Poli (2019-12-14 17:22:09)
[...]
> > I don't think the exception may also apply when the license text is
> > the *actual payload* of the package (for instance, a package shipping
> > the text for CC-by-nc-nd-v1.0, whe
Quoting Francesco Poli (2019-12-15 13:01:16)
> On Sat, 14 Dec 2019 17:41:14 +0100 Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>
> > Quoting Francesco Poli (2019-12-14 17:22:09)
> [...]
> > > I don't think the exception may also apply when the license text
> > > is the *actual payload* of the package (for instance, a
Greetings, all!
[Lurker in the Debian space, decloaking to ask a clarification.]
On 15 Dec 2019, at 07:01, Francesco Poli wrote:
>
> But can DFSG-free data be prepared for the test suite of a program
> intended to identify licenses?!? How can I test whether the program is
> able to identify CC-
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jonas Meurer
* Package name: wofi
Version : 0~2019.12.02.bbca0043e2a5
Upstream Author : Scoopta
* URL : https://hg.sr.ht/~scoopta/wofi
* License : GPL-3
Programming Lang: C
Description : application launcher for
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Rodrigo Carvalho
* Package name: kw
Version : 20191112
Upstream Author : Rodrigo Siqueira
* URL : https://github.com/kworkflow/kworkflow
* License : GPL-2
Programming Lang: Shell Script
Description : Inglorious k
On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 09:05:19AM -0500, jrb3-beckenbach.us wrote:
> A subset of the more general “can Debian core ship non-free *data*”.
Officially no, as already mentioned in this thread.
> Perhaps an argument this is really shipping a convenience *cache* of
> freely-available read-only texts.
On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 02:25:47PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> As others in this thread have pointed out, Debian explicitly omits
> classifying license fulltexts as "free software" or "non-free software".
Where does it explicitly do that?
We do that implicitly.
--
WBR, wRAR
signature.asc
Quoting Andrey Rahmatullin (2019-12-15 21:02:19)
> On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 02:25:47PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > As others in this thread have pointed out, Debian explicitly omits
> > classifying license fulltexts as "free software" or "non-free
> > software".
> Where does it explicitly d
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Jonas Meurer
* Package name: wob
Version : 0.4
Upstream Author :
* URL : https://github.com/francma/wob
* License : ISC
Programming Lang: C
Description : lightweight overlay volume/backlight/progress/anything bar
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dmitry Smirnov
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Control: affects -1 src:golang-github-containers-buildah
Package name: golang-github-openshift-api
Version: 4.0
Upstream Author: OpenShift
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Dmitry Smirnov
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org,
pkg-go-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org
Control: affects -1 src:golang-gopkg-vmihailenco-msgpack.v2
Package name: golang-github-vmihailenco-tagparser
Version: 0.1.1
Upstream Author:
Hi,
Buster has 0.7.90 of console-common, which unfortunately has a bug so that
the install-keymap binary was accidentally excluded from the package.
This was reported in August 2019 as a grave bug:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=935096
It was fixed early September in 0.7.91 an
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019, Oskar Berggren wrote:
> This was reported in August 2019 as a grave bug:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=935096
>
> It was fixed early September in 0.7.91 and migrated to testing 2019-09-13:
> https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/console-common
>
> Sadly, this f
13 matches
Mail list logo
