Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?

2016-12-02 Thread Roberto
On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 06:20:24PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > I'm already in contact with old/original maintainers of igmpproxy hosted > on sourceforge who maintained it until release of version 0.1. > > Those maintainers are not interested in maintaining igmpproxy anymore > and they agreed that

Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?

2016-12-02 Thread Pali Rohár
On Friday 02 December 2016 17:46:40 Roberto wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 03:53:53PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Pali Rohár writes ("Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?"): > > > On Thursday 24 November 2016 19:29:21 Roberto wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote

Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?

2016-12-02 Thread Roberto
On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 03:53:53PM +, Ian Jackson wrote: > Pali Rohár writes ("Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?"): > > On Thursday 24 November 2016 19:29:21 Roberto wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > > And can be included igmpproxy package into Debian

Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?

2016-12-02 Thread Ian Jackson
Pali Rohár writes ("Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?"): > On Thursday 24 November 2016 19:29:21 Roberto wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > And can be included igmpproxy package into Debian? > > > > Probably asking the authors if they can please switch the

Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?

2016-12-02 Thread Pali Rohár
On Thursday 24 November 2016 19:29:21 Roberto wrote: > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote: > > And can be included igmpproxy package into Debian? > > Probably asking the authors if they can please switch the license, it > will benefit not only Debian but anyone who download