On Sun, 2010-11-28 at 15:01 -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 14:16, Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at> wrote: > > On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 16:11 -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 14:23, Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > On Nov 14, 2010, at 12:16 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> >> On Nov 13, 2010, at 9:12 PM, Felipe Sateler wrote: > >> >> > >> >>> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 23:18, Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at> > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> pd-ggee is a short-form dh package that is a lightly modified version > >> >>>> of > >> >>>> the standard Makefile. pd-ggee in on git.debian.org/pkg-multimedia. > >> >>>> It > >> >>>> is a library without depends that are new packages but a couple of > >> >>>> other > >> >>>> ITP'ed packages depend on it. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-multimedia/pd-ggee.git;a=summary > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> I'm not quite comfortable with the license, and I am no legalese > >> >>> person so I try to stick to standard-licensed software... Could you > >> >>> please run this license through the debian-legal list to get some > >> >>> input on it? My concern is specifically about the last paragraph. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Yeah, the license is a bit weird, I don't know what its "officially" > >> >> called, but it is the same text as the [incr Tcl] license, which is > >> >> included > >> >> in Debian: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/i/itcl3/itcl3_3.4~b1-2/itcl3.copyright > >> >> > >> >> The only difference is that the GOVERNMENT USE section is more verbose > >> >> in > >> >> the itcl license, but they reference the same regulation numbers. > >> > > >> > > >> > It seems to be the Tcl/Tk license: > >> > > >> > http://www.tcl.tk/software/tcltk/license.html > >> > >> Indeed. Please add the pristine-tar data to the repository, so I can > >> generate the appropriate tarball. > > > > Oops, sorry, I forgot to push the tags and branches I suppose. They > > should be up there now. > > The changelog was not correctly dated. In order to avoid even more > delays I updated it myself. > Uploaded.
Sorry for my continuing lameness on that timestamp. Once I make updates to these packages, it'll become part of the natural flow since dch is the easiest way to update the changelog. Thanks for uploading, time to dig up a couple more! :-D .hc _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers