Re: [DEP5] License field in the first paragraph ?
Charles Plessy writes: > Le Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:42:17PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius a écrit : > > > > There seems to be consensus to add an optional License field to the > > first paragraph. […] > > Here is a first attempt. Comments welcome: the discussion was a bit > complex and I am not sure if I summarised it well. One aspect I don't see covered in your patch: ‘Copyright’ and ‘License’ only make sense as a pair (details in the preceding discussion). I think the standard should specify that if either is used, both must be used. -- \ “All my life I've had one dream: to achieve my many goals.” | `\—Homer, _The Simpsons_ | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/874o914bwt@benfinney.id.au
Re: [DEP5] License field in the first paragraph ?
Le Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:42:17PM +0200, Lars Wirzenius a écrit : > > There seems to be consensus to add an optional License field to the > first paragraph. Anyone want to make a patch, and perhaps include some > version of Russ's explanation above as rationale, so that we don't get > endless questions about this in the future? Here is a first attempt. Comments welcome: the discussion was a bit complex and I am not sure if I summarised it well. --- a/dep5.mdwn +++ b/dep5.mdwn @@ -186,6 +186,21 @@ in `debian/control` files. per-file copyright information. See also `Copyright` below in the `Files paragraph` section. + * **`License`** + * Optional + * Syntax: formatted text, with synopsis + * In the header paragraph (no `Files` specification), this field + gives the license information for the package as a whole, which + may be different or simplified from a combination of all the + per-file license information. See also `License` below in + the `Files paragraph` section. + +The `Copyright` and `License` fields in the _header paragraph_ may complement +but do not replace the _files paragraphs_. They can be used to summarise the +contributions and redistribution terms for the whole package, for instance when +a work combines a permissive and a copyleft license, or to document a +_compilation copyright_ and license. + Example: Format: -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110122050249.gb26...@merveille.plessy.net
Re: New version of DEP-5 parser
Hi Dominique, On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 09:16:59PM +0100, Dominique Dumont wrote: > I've fixed upstream [1] most (hopefully all) the issues > regarding the DEP5 parser based on Config::Model that > were mentioned on these lists or in the BTS. > The new version is already (thanks gregoa) available > on Debian/Sid in libconfig-model-perl 1.230 > I've updated the parser so as to upgrade older version > of copyright file (even pre DEP-5 versions) into the > current format. All old keywords are translated into new > keywords (except the old keywords I do not know yet about :-p ) Not having looked at the code, I'm wondering: do you apply these translations to all files regardless of the Format/Format-Specification field's value, or are you selective about only applying these upgrades to fields that were considered valid at the time? I don't think, for instance, that a file that has a declaration of Format: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/ [1] should have 'Maintainer' fields auto-upgraded to 'Upstream-Contact', but that this should instead be treated as an unknown field. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org [1] much as I disagree that an unversioned URL should be used at all here signature.asc Description: Digital signature
New version of DEP-5 parser
Hello I've fixed upstream [1] most (hopefully all) the issues regarding the DEP5 parser based on Config::Model that were mentioned on these lists or in the BTS. The new version is already (thanks gregoa) available on Debian/Sid in libconfig-model-perl 1.230 I've updated the parser so as to upgrade older version of copyright file (even pre DEP-5 versions) into the current format. All old keywords are translated into new keywords (except the old keywords I do not know yet about :-p ) For those who missed the previous thread, you can find more details in my blog [2]. Last but not least, I'll present Config::Model and its applications (including OpenSsh config and DEP-5 copyright) in the cross-distro dev room at FOSDEM in 2 weeks. Feel free to come by and let's discuss DEP5 or other possible applications. All the best Dominique [1] http://search.cpan.org/dist/Config-Model/ [2] http://ddumont.wordpress.com/2011/01/13/debian-copyright-dep5-parsereditorvalidatormigrator-is- released/ -- http://config-model.wiki.sourceforge.net/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/ http://www.ohloh.net/accounts/ddumont -o- http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201101212116.59690.domi.dum...@free.fr
Debian GNU/Linux Romania
Hi all, I've take the liberty to forward this message sent to events@d.o by Marius-Bogdan Ursan. As you can see he announces a newborn Romanian Debian community. Good luck Marius and all Romanian crew! Cheers, Francesca - Forwarded message from Ursan Marius Bogdan - Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 15:31:31 +0200 From: Ursan Marius Bogdan To: eve...@debian.org Subject: Debian GNU/Linux Romania User-Agent: ServerHost WebMail Dear Members of the Debian International Community and Members of the Debian Development Team, with great joy i announce the birth of Debian GNU/Linux Romania after 18 years since the first version of Debian was released and after several tries to build a stable community for romanian users. The last 4-5 days where essential for us, as a community. In this time we where able to build a site, still under construction but almost ready, and a forum, both in romanian language. Also the company that founds Debian GNU/Linux Romania has also created a 3rd national mirror for existing and future Debian users: http://mirrors.serverhost.ro/debian/ All of this adds to the main goal stated by Debian GNU/Linux as an "Universal Operating System" Kind regards Marius-Bogdan, Ursan -- PR Manager of Debian Gnu/Linux Romania http://debian-linux.ro/ - End forwarded message signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Debian Linux OS /// Urgent
On mar., 2011-01-11 at 15:58 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > (with my ANSSI hat on) > > On mar., 2011-01-11 at 10:32 +0100, Treuil, Malvina (GE Healthcare, > consultant) wrote: > > Dear Madam, Dear Sir, The company I work for GEHC buys the software > > containing the following encryption mean : Debian Linux. > > I would like to check with you if this encryption mean have already > > been declared to the French authorities (ANSSI). If yes, could you > > please provide me with the ANSSI declaration file number and copy? As > > we need to have them in case of an audit in France. > > Debian Project didn't made any declaration for crypto stuff to the > French authorities. For reference, crypto supply and import are free > (but subject to declaration), while export (from France) can be subject > to authorization *if it's easy for an end user to change the embedded > crypto*, else it's only declaration. More info can be found at > http://www.ssi.gouv.fr/site_rubrique58.html (in French) > > I (with my Debian hat) did the declaration for supply/import/export (on > the basis that changing the crypto usually needs a recompilation, which > is not immediate for an end user, so it's not “easy” in the original > sense). > > The official declaration should be available soon, I'll keep you posted. Sorry it took so long. The declaration file number is 1101027. Scans of the various documents are available at http://people.debian.org/~corsac/anssi/ (in French). It might be a good idea to put those somewhere on the website (not sure if we have a place for that though) in case other people will need it. Obviously, the timing is not perfect, as I'll have to make another declaration for Squeeze when it's out, but I though it was a good idea to have it first for Lenny, since the requester needed it right now and people will still use Lenny for some time. If you have any question, please ask. -- Yves-Alexis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1295618655.11245.28.camel@oban
Re: DEP5: Format example patch
On to, 2011-01-20 at 09:42 +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Agreed to both, but don't underestimate the risks of copy-paste. I > suggest the attached patch, which uses an explicit invalid placeholder > in the examples, hoping it's clear enough that it's a placeholder. Applied, thanks. -- Blog/wiki/website hosting with ikiwiki (free for free software): http://www.branchable.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1295606641.10134.0.ca...@havelock.lan
Re: Squirrelmail package availability question
On Thursday 20 January 2011 22.50:03 Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > In this specific case, there has been a concern in the past that making a > package for really small things, like a plugin that's just one short > file, would be overkill. But if you ask me, there's always some way to > deal with such concerns, One solution would be, for example, a squirrelmail-plugins package that would collect popular plugins, so the "a package for one file" problem is avoided. But like Thijs said: somebody needs to do it. cheers -- vbi -- Muße und Wohlleben sind unerläßliche Voraussetzungen aller Kultur. -- Max Frisch signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
