Your message dated Fri, 5 Jan 2024 12:24:20 +0200 with message-id <zzfy1gnlevw1d...@tty.gr> and subject line Re: Bug#1052976: Update debian/copyright with upstream's 2.0.0 AGPL->MIT change has caused the Debian Bug report #1052976, regarding Update debian/copyright with upstream's 2.0.0 AGPL->MIT change to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with. If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith. (NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org immediately.) -- 1052976: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1052976 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---Source: mold Version: 2.2.0+dfsg-1 Severity: normal With mold 2.0.0 upstream relicensed the project from the AGPL v3.0, to the MIT (or as we call it in Debian, Expat) license. Given the restrictions of the AGPL, this is a major change which could open up mold to more users. debian/copyright (as of 2.2.0+dfsg-1) has not been updated to reflect this change, and is thus potentially misleading users. This should be easy to fix :) While looking into it, I noticed that a bunch of the code shipped in thirdparty/ is not documented in d/copyright -- namely, blake3, rust-demangle, xxhash, zlib, zstd. Given you're repacking the sources anyway, perhaps the appropriate move here is to just strip the ones shipped in Debian already (xxhash, zlib and zstd, I believe) from the source, and document the rest? Thanks, Faidon
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---Version: 2.3.1+dfsg-2 On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 05:16:59PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: > debian/copyright (as of 2.2.0+dfsg-1) has not been updated to reflect > this change, and is thus potentially misleading users. This should be > easy to fix :) This is fixed. You should probably s/MIT/Expat/, as Debian's copyright-format 1.0 suggests ("There are many versions of the MIT license. Please use Expat instead, when it matches.") > While looking into it, I noticed that a bunch of the code shipped in > thirdparty/ is not documented in d/copyright -- namely, blake3, > rust-demangle, xxhash, zlib, zstd. > > Given you're repacking the sources anyway, perhaps the appropriate move > here is to just strip the ones shipped in Debian already (xxhash, zlib > and zstd, I believe) from the source, and document the rest? This is not, but it was a bit off-topic to the bug in question. Faidon
--- End Message ---
