Le Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 07:36:27PM -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit : > On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 08:41:14PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > Le Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 01:42:04PM +0000, Joerg Jaspert a écrit : > > > Hi Maintainer, > > > > rejected, i think we are missing the source for the pdf in doc/. > > > Almost two monthes of waiting to read this… > > What was the license on the PDF in question, and was the license documented > in debian/copyright?
Hi Steve (and Cyril), the package was rejected because of missing source, not for license issues. Nevertheless, if you are curious about what debian/copyright contained, here is the relevant extract: Files: doc/phyml_manual.pdf, debian/phyml_manual.tar.gz.uu Copyright: © Copyright 1999 - 2008 by PhyML Development Team License: formerly free for academic only, but relicenced on the upstream website. The software PhyML is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind. In no event shall the authors or his employer be held responsible for any damage resulting from the use of this software, including but not limited to the frustration that you may experience in using the package. The program package and this documentation, are distributed free of charge for academic use only. Permission is granted to copy and use programs in the package provided no fee is charged for it and provided that this copyright notice is not removed. X-Comment: After discussion with the upstream maintainer, the documentation was relicenced and an updated version was published on the upstream web site with the following the new disclaimer: . The software PhyML is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind. In no event shall the authors or his employer be held responsible for any damage resulting from the use of this software, including but not limited to the frustration that you may experience in using the package. . This relicencing also affects the version shipped in this package, and the documentation will be updated with the next upstream release of PhyML. Since there is no licence but only a disclaimer, I conclude that the PDF file is licenced under the same terms of the rest of phyml, namely the GNU GPL. If, in a package that has a general license statement, there are files for which an explicit reminder of the statement is strictly required to prove their freedom, then I would like to see it documented somewhere. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
