Re: FreeMedForms projet

On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 08:39:48AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > > The bigger problem for entering Debian is what Andreas mentions, that > the software uses Qt4 instead of Qt5. Once you have released a new > version that uses Qt5 it could potentially enter Debian. To be correct: Version 0.9.4 in Debi

Re: FreeMedForms projet

It looks like this bug went from "Qt4->Qt5" to "no longer DFSG-free." On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 17:34:35 +0100 Eric Maeker wrote: > Oh! There is a misunderstanding here! > Let me correct my words: > -> full code of each stable released version is packaged and freely > available (but undocumented sin

Re: FreeMedForms projet

On Fri, 2020-01-10 at 17:34 +0100, Eric Maeker wrote: > We know that at least two forks exists (this is what our private data > server's log tells us). We do not receive any patch, invitation to > git repos, or any kind of official informations or queries. Having multiple forks and having folks n

Re: FreeMedForms projet

On Fri, 2020-01-10 at 13:01 +0100, Eric Maeker wrote: > Sounds like we are travelling to "contrib" or "non-free" package ? Or > may be "non-debian" ? The section of Debian a package is added to depends solely on the DFSG compliance of the software (freely licensed and released source code). Wheth

Re: FreeMedForms projet

On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 04:18:26 + Paul Wise wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 2:02 AM Paul Wise wrote: > > > I don't like this, people seeking source code should not have to get > > approval first. That said, I note that the source code is available > > directly from the site without approval. >

Re: FreeMedForms projet

Oh! There is a misunderstanding here! Let me correct my words: -> full code of each stable released version is packaged and freely available (but undocumented since v1.0.0). Code is considered 100% stable (and released) when : - it perfectly passes every the unit-tests in debug mode with MacOs, Wi

Re: FreeMedForms projet

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 07:45:34AM -0500, Daniel Hakimi wrote: > Can you please clarify -- you said the license was the same, but you didn't > say what that license actually was. What license is your code available > under? GPL-3+ [1] BTW, I think if a Debian package is published the requirement

Re: FreeMedForms projet

Can you please clarify -- you said the license was the same, but you didn't say what that license actually was. What license is your code available under? On Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 07:18 Eric Maeker wrote: > Hi, > > For now, our NPO is too poor to engage in consulting or to pay external > developmen

Re: FreeMedForms projet

Hi, For now, our NPO is too poor to engage in consulting or to pay external developments and we awfully miss time to manage all aspects of a widely collaborative project. Sounds like we are travelling to "contrib" or "non-free" package ? Or may be "non-debian" ? Belle journée Cordialement