Hi,
Thank you for pointing the issue. They've using WTFPL license in the
gemspec file. But in their source code (i.e. GitHub Repository) they are using
license text of expat[1] and they updated their gemspec file to use MIT expat
license[2] in master branch. That's why I gave the license as expat.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Tuesday, October 5th, 2021 at 11:30 PM, Thorsten Alteholz
<ftpmas...@ftp-master.debian.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> according to uc.micro-rb.gemspec the license is WTFPL. Where did you get the
> information about the Expat license?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Thorsten
>
>
> ===========================================================================================================================================
>
> Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why
>
> your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our
>
> concerns.
[1] - https://github.com/digitalmoksha/uc.micro-rb/blob/v1.0.5/LICENSE
[2] -
https://github.com/digitalmoksha/uc.micro-rb/blob/master/uc.micro-rb.gemspec#L11
Thanks,
Vivek K J
_______________________________________________
Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers@alioth-lists.debian.net
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
