Hi Jim!
On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, Jim Lynch wrote:
> Hi :)
>
> I have no objection to telling some fact to any maint...
The problem is that dh_make (and not debhelper - sorry JoeyH) creates
a sample file which
| refers to the Free Documentation License by the file name:
Collect all licenses into one place no matter what they are?
Fine.
But -not- in base.
-Jim
Hi :)
I have no objection to telling some fact to any maint...
But the debhelper maintainer isn't the central repository for licenses...
so I don't see how that makes sense.
But I'm going to read the FDL, and if it meets DFSG and is compatible with
and does the same thing as the GPL does for so
Collect all licenses no matter what they are into one place?
Fine.
But -not- in base.
-Jim
OK, I'll read it and comment. If it's compatible with GPL, does the same
things that it does and is dfsg-free, then I do want it in.
-Jim
On 14-Dec-00, 17:20 (CST), Chris Waters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:09:33PM -0500, Susan G. Kleinmann wrote:
>
> > But I think we're all hoping that the FDL actually becomes common,
> > and putting it into the common-licenses directory is one step toward
> > making tha
Peter Palfrader wrote:
> Why no? I'ld guess telling the debhelper maintainer about this issue is not
> that of a bad idea.
Well to start with, debhelper != dh-make.
BTW, and FWIW, I do not belive the FDL is a DFSG complient license if
invarient sections are used. Besides invarient sections it has
Hi Jim!
Susan wrote in the mail you replied to:
| OK, then I guess you should forward this report to debhelper.
and in the original report:
| The debhelper script dh_make inserts a sample manpage.sgml.ex file into
| a new debian directory when a package is being built. This sample file
| refers
* Jim Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001215 07:04]:
> Perhaps one reason it's not a common license, is it's unknown whether
> the license is dfsg-free. I certainly don't know; there may be others
> like me:)
Does any of this really matter?
I'm all for adding any old blasted license to the common-lice
On Fri, Dec 15, 2000 at 05:55:52AM -0800, Jim Lynch wrote:
> Here's a datapoint for ya... this is proof that "everyone wants this license
> in the base of debian" isn't true, at least not now.
>
> What is FDL?
Free Documentation License. You can find it in licenses section of
gnu.org.
--
Christ
Hi, and no :)
the way to make a license common is for its use to increase. If you are
a developer, you can start by including the text for it in your package.
Another way, try incorporating software that uses that license.
Perhaps one reason it's not a common license, is it's unknown whether
the
Here's a datapoint for ya... this is proof that "everyone wants this license
in the base of debian" isn't true, at least not now.
What is FDL?
Q.E.D.
-Jim
> I just think that a license first needs to become common and then be added
> to that directory, not the other way around.
OK, then I guess you should forward this report to debhelper.
Thanks,
Susan
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:09:33PM -0500, Susan G. Kleinmann wrote:
> > But is it really a common license? Perhaps dh_make's template manual page
> > should be corrected instead.
>
> I understand and appreciate the desirability of keeping the base-files
> package small. But I think we're all hop
On Thu, Dec 14, 2000 at 01:09:33PM -0500, Susan G. Kleinmann wrote:
> But I think we're all hoping that the FDL actually becomes common,
> and putting it into the common-licenses directory is one step toward
> making that happen.
I would describe it more as putting the cart before the horse.
At
> But is it really a common license? Perhaps dh_make's template manual page
> should be corrected instead.
I understand and appreciate the desirability of keeping the base-files
package small. But I think we're all hoping that the FDL actually becomes
common, and putting it into the common-lice
On Wed, Dec 13, 2000 at 02:29:53PM -0500, Susan G. Kleinmann wrote:
> Package: base-files
> Version: 2.2.4
> Severity: Normal
>
> The debhelper script dh_make inserts a sample manpage.sgml.ex file into
> a new debian directory when a package is being built. This sample file
> refers to the Free D
17 matches
Mail list logo
