[task #16489] Submission of ArcadeFighter Game Engine

Follow-up Comment #5, task#16489 (group administration): > Regarding my previous submission, like I said, I do understand my mistake and I do understand why you take it seriously, but it will take a wile to stop using some terms as I have never been formally introduced to them before and have bee

[task #16485] Submission of NetUseMod

Follow-up Comment #10, task#16485 (group administration): Thank you! [comment #9 comment #9:] > Some packaging rules changed in recent year which I was not aware of. Not really. > I added other tool licenses and a README in the image directory for copyright notice. > (the image is not important

[task #16485] Submission of NetUseMod

Update of task#16485 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #12: Sorry for was

[task #16482] Submission of brp - portable preprocesser

Update of task#16482 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #5: Thank you, can

[task #16493] Submission of Emirhan Ucan

Update of task#16493 (group administration): Status:None => Cancelled Assigned to:None => ineiev Open/Closed:Open =&g

[task #16484] Submission of Andesaurux Kernel

Follow-up Comment #4, task#16484 (group administration): If there is no further interest, I'll cancel this submission. ___ Reply to this item at: ___

[task #16495] Submission of chirag gadhiya

Update of task#16495 (group administration): Status:None => Cancelled Assigned to:None => ineiev Open/Closed:Open =&g

[task #16497] Submission of Andesaurux

Update of task#16497 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: &

[task #16497] Submission of Andesaurux

Follow-up Comment #3, task#16497 (group administration): > My previous request was to publish my OS(at that time it was a kernel), but forgot to list dependencies I see; so I'm cancelling your previous request. ___ Reply to this item at:

[task #16484] Submission of Andesaurux Kernel

Update of task#16484 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #5: Cancelling per

[task #16497] Submission of Andesaurux

Follow-up Comment #4, task#16497 (group administration): Your new submission still has so many issues, I even have to doubt that you've ever read our hosting requirements. You misidentified the license your package uses, your files miss valid copyright and license notices, your README says it's [

[task #16497] Submission of Andesaurux

Follow-up Comment #7, task#16497 (group administration): I agree that the intentions matter; however, the actions are more important. The question at hand is whether your package is likely to follow our hosting requirements. ___ Reply to

[task #16499] Submission of libcroco

Update of task#16499 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1:

[task #16499] Submission of libcroco

Follow-up Comment #4, task#16499 (group administration): [comment #2 comment #2:] > Sure: I looked it up in the Copyright file of the top-level directory of libxml2. The URL is https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libxml2/-/raw/master/Copyright?ref_type=heads&inline=false Thank you. That's the Expat l

[task #16511] Submission of Andesaurux

Update of task #16511 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1:

[task #16511] Submission of Andesaurux

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16511 (group administration): I see; could we proceed in task #16497? As an admin of Savannah, I can update the license displayed on the main page of your package; however, I strongly suggest that you choose the licenses from our list. We can't evaluate new licenses f

[task #16511] Submission of Andesaurux

Follow-up Comment #5, task #16511 (group administration): Let us start with the minor issue: could we please proceed in the original task #16497? ___ Reply to this item at:

[task #16511] Submission of Andesaurux

Follow-up Comment #6, task #16511 (group administration): If there is no further interest, I'll cancel this submission. ___ Reply to this item at: __

[task #16497] Submission of Andesaurux

Update of task #16497 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #8: No response;

[task #16511] Submission of Andesaurux

Update of task #16511 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #7: No response;

[task #16530] Submission of uweb browser documentation for AOSP

Update of task #16530 (group administration): Status:None => Cancelled Assigned to:None => ineiev Open/Closed:Open =&g

[task #16532] Submission of Michael 'Mac' McDaniel

Update of task #16532 (group administration): Status:None => Cancelled Assigned to:None => ineiev Open/Closed:Open =&g

[task #16534] Submission of dr

Update of task #16534 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Your p

[task #16534] Submission of dr

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16534 (group administration): Still the package seems very simple to me. May I suggest that you re-submit it when it's clear that your program is big enough for a dedicated Savane group? ___ Reply to this item

[task #16537] Submission of Learn GNU Linux

Update of task #16537 (group administration): Status:None => Cancelled Assigned to:None => ineiev Open/Closed:Open =&g

[task #16534] Submission of dr

Update of task #16534 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #4: No response;

[task #16538] Submission of Zaurbox

Update of task #16538 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Firs

[task #16538] Submission of Zaurbox

Follow-up Comment #4, task #16538 (group administration): Thank you! Your new README.md is identical to the one packed in the original submission. Please update sh.c as well; also, please [//www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html#license-files add the text version of the GPL] to your tarball, that'

[task #16540] Submission of Republishing Public Domain Books with Lisp

Update of task #16540 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: The t

[task #16538] Submission of Zaurbox

Follow-up Comment #6, task #16538 (group administration): [comment #5 comment #5:] > I have sent a new tarball, is it OK? No, not really. It seems to me, you have basic understanding of most things needed, but couldn't collect all the pieces together yet. __

[task #16542] Submission of Ajla

Update of task #16542 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: A few

[task #16542] Submission of Ajla

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16542 (group administration): > The files that don't contain copyright and license notices are generated. Files like README don't look like generated. > Does copyright apply to generated files? It depends. If I generate a tarball from Emacs sources, it will be copy

[task #16540] Submission of Republishing Public Domain Books with Lisp

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16540 (group administration): > The thing is that this is not just fiction, this is a proper program that is programmed in a DSL (`#lang`) of Racket called Pollen[0]. If you were able to get the source code, check the `pollen.rkt` file. I shall be adding a few of those

[task #16542] Submission of Ajla

Update of task #16542 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #5: Thank you, ca

[task #16548] Submission of guile_llama_cpp

Update of task #16548 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Pleas

[task #16538] Submission of Zaurbox

Follow-up Comment #7, task #16538 (group administration): If there is no further interest, I'll cancel this submission. ___ Reply to this item at: __

[task #16540] Submission of Republishing Public Domain Books with Lisp

Follow-up Comment #4, task #16540 (group administration): If there is no further interest, I'll cancel this submission. ___ Reply to this item at: __

[task #16548] Submission of guile_llama_cpp

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16548 (group administration): Thank you! You've added a copy of the LGPL, but have you read it? Also, some inconsistency is still present in the URLs your license notices include; please use the exact form of the copyright notice the GPL Howto provides. Then, files l

[task #16548] Submission of guile_llama_cpp

Update of task #16548 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Done Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #5: Thank you, ap

[task #16553] Submission of sox_ng

Update of task #16553 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1:

[task #16553] Submission of sox_ng

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16553 (group administration): [comment #2 comment #2:] ... > There may be other ways to achieve this, like making other group members also admins of the project, but that may be too much. If I can privately give the keys to its admin mail and site logins to one or two p

[task #16553] Submission of sox_ng

Follow-up Comment #5, task #16553 (group administration): > I've done an analysis of its source code and optional libraries. The optional > libraries with which it can link are all GPLv2 or later, LGPLv2 or later, > LGPLv2.1 or later, Two-clause BSD, Xiph, Wavpack or Zlib except for two, > Openco

[task #16538] Submission of Zaurbox

Update of task #16538 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #8: No response;

[task #16540] Submission of Republishing Public Domain Books with Lisp

Update of task #16540 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #5: No response;

[task #16556] Submission of ebrowser

Update of task #16556 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: &q

[task #16556] Submission of ebrowser

Follow-up Comment #4, task #16556 (group administration): [comment #3 comment #3:] > The license used by electron is "Expat License". But it seems that the submission can not be modified. No need to modify the submission, thank you. ___ R

[task #16556] Submission of ebrowser

Follow-up Comment #5, task #16556 (group administration): [comment #2 comment #2:] > Chromium links to proprietary plugins. Plugins are optional and electron has no plugin bundled. As far as I understand it, it isn't necessary for a JavaScript code to be 'bundled' in order to make a single progra

[task #16556] Submission of ebrowser

Follow-up Comment #7, task #16556 (group administration): [reordered] [comment #6 comment #6:] > > Chromium project is used to build shared library for electron. Do you know > which part of chromium is proprietary? No, I don't. > If you can provide more information, I > can dig deeper to find o

[task #16553] Submission of sox_ng

Follow-up Comment #11, task #16553 (group administration): The licensing team told me they are not sure what you are asking about. Could you formulate specific questions? ___ Reply to this item at:

[task #16553] Submission of sox_ng

Follow-up Comment #13, task #16553 (group administration): [comment #12 comment #12:] > To put it another way, are any of the categories of files, given the new permissions from the contactable authors, incompatible with the GPLv3-or-later? > > I've examined all the files, now someone needs to ex

[task #16556] Submission of ebrowser

Follow-up Comment #9, task #16556 (group administration): If there is no further interest, I'll cancel this submission. ___ Reply to this item at: __

[task #16553] Submission of sox_ng

Update of task #16553 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #15: Thank you; c

[task #16553] Submission of sox_ng

Follow-up Comment #17, task #16553 (group administration): > Just to let you know, it turned out the sox is GPL2 only because `srec/opus.c` > was derived from `oggenc.c` which is GPL2 only, so it couldn't have been > hosted on savannah.nongnu.org. Thank you! __

[task #16556] Submission of ebrowser

Update of task #16556 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #10: No response;

[task #16581] Submission of wifi-bear

Update of task #16581 (group administration): Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Your package is a very short single file. We discourage simplistic packages on Savan

[task #16581] Submission of wifi-bear

Update of task #16581 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress ___ Reply to this item at: ___

[task #16582] Submission of ChuspaPostalServices

Update of task #16582 (group administration): Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/

[task #16583] Submission of elosort

Update of task #16583 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Your p

[task #16583] Submission of elosort

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16583 (group administration): I'm sorry I wasn't clear. My point was, we generally don't host very small packages at Savannah. We don't provide repositories separate from groups. ___ Reply to this item at:

[task #16583] Submission of elosort

Update of task #16583 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #5: Thank you; ca

[task #16582] Submission of ChuspaPostalServices

Follow-up Comment #4, task #16582 (group administration): Please make sure that all copyrightable files in your tarball have [//savannah.gnu.org/maintenance/ValidNotices/ valid copyright and license notices]. ___ Reply to this item at:

[task #16582] Submission of ChuspaPostalServices

Update of task #16582 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress ___ Reply to this item at: ___

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Update of task #16584 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Pleas

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16584 (group administration): [comment #2 comment #2:] > I altered NOTICE file in the main directory and write: > The whole project is published under . [//www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#PublicDomain Public domain isn't a license], public domain means that the

[task #16581] Submission of wifi-bear

Update of task #16581 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #2: No response;

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #6, task #16584 (group administration): Thank you! As far as I can see, you decided to use the LGPL. The GNU Project has a nice [//gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html document explaining how to apply GNU licenses] to one's own programs; please read and follow it.

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #8, task #16584 (group administration): Thank you! Tomorrow is Friday, 13; let us continue after 2024-09-14. Meanwhile, feel free to make further revisions based on what was discussed here and in the documents I referred to. ___

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #10, task #16584 (group administration): Okay, thank you, and let us proceed. The HowTo reads, Also add a COPYING.LESSER file with a copy of the GNU LGPL, if you use that. Can you explain the first word in that sentence? Did you read the LGPL?

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #12, task #16584 (group administration): It seems to me, you misinterpreted it, again. COPYING.LESSER should contain the text of the GNU LGPL. Please read the LGPL once more. The text is far from simple, but since you use it for your package, you should understand it very well

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #14, task #16584 (group administration): > I've carefully read the LGPLv3 again. In other words, carefully reading doesn't help understand the license. Let us try analyzing. * Does your tarball qualify as the Corresponding Source for your package? * Let us imagine that somebo

[task #16582] Submission of ChuspaPostalServices

Follow-up Comment #6, task #16582 (group administration): The issue hasn't been fixed. Did you attach a wrong file? ___ Reply to this item at: ___ M

[task #16582] Submission of ChuspaPostalServices

Follow-up Comment #13, task #16582 (group administration): > I have tried do make then in multiple lines using something similar to array (a series of itens listed inside a pair of square brackets), but I got te following message from Trisquel's Abrowser WebExtension interpreter: Invalid locale m

[task #16589] Submission of P2P Social Network Pandora

Follow-up Comment #4, task #16589 (group administration): > I've created file "./view/media.licenses" where is listed media file > and their licenses. Also I've added a text to README.TXT: > "Pandora is distributed with GNU GPLv2 license, also you can > distribute the code with 3 version, or any

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #40, task #16584 (group administration): > I am sorry I made confusions to you. I mean, since requiring a copy of LGPL a > the source tarball is a set of additional permissions, and I may at my option > remove any additional permissions, it says the license gives the right to me

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #36, task #16584 (group administration): > > Let us see where that passage mentions the LGPL. > > > The LGPL is definitely not "copyright notice". > > The LGPL isn't a notice stating that "this License" (that is, the GPL) > applies to the code. > > The LGPL has nothing to do wi

[task #16592] Submission of stealthcavern-ded-srv

Update of task #16592 (group administration): Status:None => Postponed Assigned to:None => ineiev Depends on: => ta

[task #16591] Submission of Stealthcavern

Update of task #16591 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Fo

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #34, task #16584 (group administration): > To talk about the case of distributing unmodified source code, since the LGPL > is an additional text to the GPL license, we could check the GPL license, in > the GPL license, there is: > > 4. Conveying Verbatim Copies. > > You may co

[task #16590] Submission of byggsteg

Update of task #16590 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Pleas

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #32, task #16584 (group administration): > > I'm not sure I understand the bottom line. Have you succeeded to > > confirm with the text of the licenses that including the LGPL > > in a distribution is a requirement? > > Yes I confirm including the LGPL in a distribution is a r

Re: [task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

> > I don't think I understand what 'use the license as a guide' means. > > As the previous conversations mentioned the LGPL and the GPL license can't > force copyright holders what to do, at the same time, if I want to send > StoneValley to others, I am also conveying a package, so I (as the copy

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #44, task #16584 (group administration): > > I don't think I understand what 'use the license as a guide' means. > > As the previous conversations mentioned the LGPL and the GPL license can't > force copyright holders what to do, at the same time, if I want to send > StoneValle

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #46, task #16584 (group administration): > I noticed the LGPL doesn't have a guidance for applying LGPL to a new program. No, not in its text. > But, in the LGPL there are: > 2. Conveying Modified Versions. > 3. Object Code Incorporating Material from Library Header Files. >

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #48, task #16584 (group administration): On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 02:58:01PM -0400, John Cage wrote: > > Could you please check the GPL HowTo once again? > > https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-howto.html > > Now I got it, I need to add both LGPL and GPL license to my project, becau

[task #16594] Submission of cowsay power tools plugins

Update of task #16594 (group administration): Status:None => In Progress Assigned to:None => ineiev ___ Follow-up Comment #1: Fo

[task #16582] Submission of ChuspaPostalServices

Follow-up Comment #17, task #16582 (group administration): Thank you! Savannah hosting requirements include releasing the documentation in a FDL-compatible way. Currently, your README file is released under GPLv3+. Could you fix that? https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/License-Notices

[task #16594] Submission of cowsay power tools plugins

Follow-up Comment #6, task #16594 (group administration): > [comment #3 comment #3:] > Hello, if you are waiting for me to fill out the dependencies, No; please give me a day or two for every reply. > I don't know how to do that. So I just leaved them as a comment in the Discussion. You did it

[task #16594] Submission of cowsay power tools plugins

Follow-up Comment #5, task #16594 (group administration): > > for LV2: > > *libboost1.74-dev [BSL-1.0] https://www.boost.org/ > https://packages.trisquel.org/changelogs/pool/main/b/boost1.74/boost1.74_1.74.0-14ubuntu3/copyright ... > FAUST Version 2.74.6 [GPL-2.1+] https://faust.grame.fr/ > https

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #38, task #16584 (group administration): > Yes, you are correct. Requiring a copy of LGPL a the source tarball is a set > of additional permissions. So, I can follow your guide add or remove a copy of > LGPL. I'm not sure I understand this. Don't you understand yourself yet wh

[task #16590] Submission of byggsteg

Follow-up Comment #3, task #16590 (group administration): This package has issues that should be addressed before the registration is approved. Generally, do you want to work on them? ___ Reply to this item at:

[task #16582] Submission of ChuspaPostalServices

Update of task #16582 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Done Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #19: Thank you, a

[task #16592] Submission of stealthcavern-ded-srv

Update of task #16592 (group administration): Status: Postponed => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #1: No response i

[task #16591] Submission of Stealthcavern

Update of task #16591 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #3: No response;

[task #16590] Submission of byggsteg

Update of task #16590 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Cancelled Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #6: No response;

[task #16594] Submission of cowsay power tools plugins

Follow-up Comment #8, task #16594 (group administration): Thank you! First, a really minor note: both the [//www.gnu.org/l/gpl-3.0.txt current text version of the GPLv3] and the GPL HowTo use HTTPS URLs, while in your tarball HTTP ones are used. Then, it's sufficient to have one copy of the GPL

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #42, task #16584 (group administration): On Sun, Oct 13, 2024 at 08:34:06AM -0400, John Cage wrote: > Follow-up Comment #41, task #16584 (group administration): > > > > I'm afraid this still sounds confusing to me. We have discussed that > > the copyright holders were not boun

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #53, task #16584 (group administration): comment #52: > > Sir/madam, I considered that the line 5-14 is for README file itself to > declare licenses, and the line 25 declared the whole project was published > under GPLv3+. First, line 5 says, "StoneValley is free software"; in

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #69, task #16584 (group administration): > Yes, I do think so. I will make the following revision: > Put the whole GFDL license with ./README > ./NOTICE and ./Example/README only include copyright notice, because to > declare that these documents are published with GFDL again is

[task #16584] Submission of StoneValley

Follow-up Comment #71, task #16584 (group administration): I see; it may be redundant in the sense that other documents could refer to a single copy. However, you shouldn't forget that every copyrightable file should have a license notice. Currently, NOTICE hasn't, has it?

[task #16593] Submission of NB More Concrete

Update of task #16593 (group administration): Status: In Progress => Done Open/Closed:Open => Closed ___ Follow-up Comment #13: Thank you, approving.

<    13   14   15   16   17   18   19   >