Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Hi, Am 30.12.2017 um 01:24 schrieb Simon McVittie: > On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 at 22:24:23 +0100, Markus Koschany wrote: >> Am 29.12.2017 um 00:06 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: >>> Using 'Files: *' when different files are under different licenses >>> sacrifices precision, but it doesn't sacrifice accuracy.

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 12:24:19AM +, Simon McVittie wrote: > On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 at 22:24:23 +0100, Markus Koschany wrote: > > Am 29.12.2017 um 00:06 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > > I had to split the game into four digestible pieces (which are in total > > 1.2 GB large). My original idea was to

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

On Fri, 29 Dec 2017 at 22:24:23 +0100, Markus Koschany wrote: > Am 29.12.2017 um 00:06 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > > Using 'Files: *' when different files are under different licenses > > sacrifices precision, but it doesn't sacrifice accuracy. You can say > > > > Files: * > > License: GPL-2

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Markus Koschany writes: > Am 29.12.2017 um 23:35 schrieb Russ Allbery: >> Policy does not require that. ftpmaster might, which is not quite the >> same thing. > That's a bold claim. > "Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its copyright > information and

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Am 29.12.2017 um 23:35 schrieb Russ Allbery: > Markus Koschany writes: > >> Ok I can see the misunderstanding now. The above statement would be >> incorrect for freeorion because it translates to: > >> You are allowed to use the files under GPL-2 and Permissive-License-1 >> and

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Markus Koschany writes: > Ok I can see the misunderstanding now. The above statement would be > incorrect for freeorion because it translates to: > You are allowed to use the files under GPL-2 and Permissive-License-1 > and Permissive-License-2 and ... > But this is not true.

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Am 28.12.2017 um 23:10 schrieb Russ Allbery: > Markus Koschany writes: > >> Why do we add the BSD license to common-licenses but not MIT and zlib? > > I'm not sure why the BSD license was included in common-licenses > originally. My theory was that it was to include all the

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Am 29.12.2017 um 00:06 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: [...] > Using 'Files: *' when different files are under different licenses > sacrifices precision, but it doesn't sacrifice accuracy. You can say > > Files: * > License: GPL-2 and Permissive-License-1 and Permissive-License-2 and ... > > Or you

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Hello Jonathan, On Thu, Dec 28 2017, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Using 'Files: *' when different files are under different licenses > sacrifices precision, but it doesn't sacrifice accuracy. You can say > > Files: * License: GPL-2 and Permissive-License-1 and > Permissive-License-2 and ... > >

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Markus Koschany wrote: >> freeorion: [1] >> >> Rather sophisticated game GPL-2 licensed but with various contributions >> / incorporations under different licenses. So I can't just write Files: >> * -> GPL-2. I have to list all licenses with separate paragraphs [...] >

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Markus Koschany wrote: > freeorion: [1] > > Rather sophisticated game GPL-2 licensed but with various contributions > / incorporations under different licenses. So I can't just write Files: > * -> GPL-2. I have to list all licenses with separate paragraphs and > there is no way to change that

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Am 28.12.2017 um 22:19 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > Hi, > > Markus Koschany wrote: > >> I still have to quote license texts verbatim. The only >> "advantage" of the old format is that I can format d/copyright more >> freely but the same information must be present anyway. It is simply

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Markus Koschany writes: > Why do we add the BSD license to common-licenses but not MIT and zlib? I'm not sure why the BSD license was included in common-licenses originally. My theory was that it was to include all the licenses mentioned by name in the DFSG. However, the

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Hi, Markus Koschany wrote: > I still have to quote license texts verbatim. The only > "advantage" of the old format is that I can format d/copyright more > freely but the same information must be present anyway. It is simply not > feasible to educate all upstreams in existence to

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Am 28.12.2017 um 20:39 schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > Markus Koschany wrote: >> Am 28.12.2017 um 11:21 schrieb Bill Allombert: >>> On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 01:56:44PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Jonathan Nieder writes: > > Seconded. license-count says this makes

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Markus Koschany wrote: > Am 28.12.2017 um 11:21 schrieb Bill Allombert: >> On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 01:56:44PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: >>> Jonathan Nieder writes: Seconded. >>> >>> license-count says this makes sense: >>> >>> SIL OFL 1.0 12 >>> SIL OFL 1.1

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Am 28.12.2017 um 11:21 schrieb Bill Allombert: > On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 01:56:44PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: >> Jonathan Nieder writes: >>> Markus Koschany wrote: >> as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG licenses are added to

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 01:56:44PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: > Jonathan Nieder writes: > > Markus Koschany wrote: > > >> as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG > >> licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package > >>

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Jonathan Nieder writes: > Markus Koschany wrote: >> as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG >> licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package >> maintainers are allowed to reference them. >> >> License: OFL-1.1 >> Source:

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Markus Koschany wrote: > as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG > licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package > maintainers are allowed to reference them. > > License: OFL-1.1 > Source: https://opensource.org/licenses/OFL-1.1 > Example

Bug#884228: debian-policy: please add OFL-1.1 to common licenses

Package: debian-policy Version: 4.1.2.0 Severity: normal Hi, as discussed on debian-devel [1] I would like to request that more DFSG licenses are added to /usr/share/common-licenses and that package maintainers are allowed to reference them. License: OFL-1.1 Source: