Bug#964090: Please upload backport

On 13 December 2020 20:19:42 UTC, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote: >Hi, > >Cc'in the security-team alias. > >It is actually unlikely for the moment that we will revert the >200-disable-ghostscript-formats.patch patch again, which was firstly >included in the 8:6.9.10.23+dfsg-2.1+deb10u1 upload. It

Bug#964090: Error when converting from "jpg" to "pdf" since security upgrade "8:6.9.10.23+dfsg-2.1+deb10u1"

Additional information from upstream at https://imagemagick.org/discourse-server/viewtopic.php?t=36287 suggests it was disabled because of something in ghostscript 9.26 I think buster already has 9.27 from security so I think we could update the imagemagick default configuration. Is there good

Bug#928814: package-update-indicator grayed out

view only) >From e2319e4dd2cc94742e1a0a75e2d612af13e74d68 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: MJ Ray Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 12:17:10 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] * debian/patches/10_vendor_update_command.patch: add a reasonable default (Closes: #928814) * debian/tests/control: add test for update-command default being set i

Bug#924888: why bsd.license?

Thank you to both of you for your excellent improvements to reduce the number of broken links on the web. -- MJR http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ Member of http://www.software.coop/ (but this email is my personal view only) pgpKuCXyahUhN.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Bug#924888: why bsd.license?

On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 12:26:13 +0200 Laura Arjona Reina wrote: > BSD, and > > I have checked that the content of the bsd.license file matches the > BSD-3-Clause license at opensource.org, so I've updated the links to > > https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause > > and removed the file.

Bug#919356: Fw: Bug#919356: dwarves-dfsg: Copyright/licensing is unclear

Missed the bug off the CC for this. Sorry. Begin forwarded message: Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2019 13:34:13 + From: MJ Ray To: debian-le...@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Bug#919356: dwarves-dfsg: Copyright/licensing is unclear Domenico Andreoli skribis: > the situation of dwarves-d

Bug#877949: Package description: do you really mean "offload"?

Christian Seiler wrote: > I'm open to improving the package description, but I do want to keep > the work "offload" in a prominent position there, as that is the > standard technical term in this field, and people who want to use that > functionality will search for that

Bug#877906: hwinfo: hangs forever at > bios.2: ram

Package: hwinfo Version: 21.49-1 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, Running "hwinfo --bios" displays things overtyping itself then hangs forever with "> bios.2: ram" displayed. Running it in strace shows that this is just after it opens /dev/mem Thanks for any assistance or advice you can

Bug#757452: iceowl-extension: notify attendees not working on caldav calendar events

Package: iceowl-extension Version: 24.7.0-1~deb7u1 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, * What led up to the situation? I was creating an event in the calendar and adding remote (not on my caldav server) attendees. * What exactly did you do (or not do) that was effective (or

Bug#722563: lxlauncher: does not display debian menus

Package: lxlauncher Version: 0.2.2-3 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, lxlauncher only shows a small subset of the installed applications, while I would expect it to offer access to as many as possible. It seems capable of using the full debian menu with only a few changes, so please would you

Bug#707651: Wiki password recovery not working for me

Steve McIntyre 93...@debian.org Slightly taken aback by the severity: important bug, but whatever... It's debatably correct: important: a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a package, without rendering it completely unusable to everyone. Being unable to recover a password has a

Bug#701938: [www.debian.org] Debian Trademarks: Branden Robinson presented as DPL

Holger wrote: The Debian UK Society, by Branden Robinson (Debian Project Leader at the time of decision). That line is rather moot. That business no longer exists and I think zack has just terminated its licence for that reason.

Bug#692824: dtc-common: User cronjobs form minutes option name-value mismatch

Package: dtc-common Version: 0.34.6-1~bpo60+1 Severity: normal Tags: patch upstream In client panel: domain: Cron jobs, the option Each 10 minutes actually runs the job every 15 minutes, the Each 15 minutes runs it every 20 and so on. This seems to be a misplaced closing comment around line 50

Bug#690879: supybot: Rejects valid URLs as invalid if they contain authentication info

for the error was the RSS module, which I think doesn't use getUrlFd but passes the URL as-is to feedparser, which copes with it. Is Limnoria in debian? Regards, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems

Bug#690853: evolution: Setup requires username and password entered repeatedly

Package: evolution Version: 2.30.3-5 Severity: normal Even if access to many services on a server uses one username and password, evolution still needs the details entering 5 or more times. Each user has imap, smtp, cal, shared caldav calendars, and so on. Each of these has to be set up manually

Bug#690879: supybot: Rejects valid URLs as invalid if they contain authentication info

Package: supybot Version: 0.83.4.1.ds-2 Severity: normal Any commands that are defined as expecting a URL will reject some valid URLs if they contain a username and/or password and an @ before the hostname. I have checked and it is not fixed upstream at sourceforge. I have a possible patch for

Bug#690797: mpt-status: fails to detect controller for Dell LSI 53c1030

Package: mpt-status Version: 1.2.0-7 Severity: normal lspci reports LSI Logic / Symbios Logic 53c1030 PCI-X Fusion-MPT Dual Ultra320 SCSI mpt-status -p returns Nothing found, contact the author Package sends an email saying that every two hours. -- System Information: Debian

Bug#690231: wiki.debian.org: error in Locale page (sshd vs. ssh))

Paul Wise p...@debian.org On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Francesco Potortì wrote: There is a field named ReCaptcha (required) without any picture or input field. And I am refused subscription because I entered no captcha. It is likely that you will need to enable JavaScript, accept

Bug#678536: lists.debian.org - list info page displays link to recent archives even when there is no archive

Package: lists.debian.org Severity: normal Pages like http://lists.debian.org/debian-bugs-dist/ for lists with no archive still include pYou can link to the a href=recentmost recent page/a in the archives for this list./p right above the text that says there is no archive. Unsurprisingly, the

Bug#678539: wiki.debian.org - Immutable Page on all pages

Package: wiki.debian.org Severity: normal Every page on the wiki says Immutable Page even when they can be edited if one logs in. If registration is required, change the message to Login to Edit or just hide it for unauthenticated users. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Bug#678540: wiki.debian.org - no accessible login/registration method

Package: wiki.debian.org Severity: normal The account creation page http://wiki.debian.org/FrontPage?action=newaccount requires people to pass a reCaptcha, which is annoying for able-bodied users and downright impossible for some users with disabilities. The login page

Bug#637622: config file modifiable by users in /var/lib/dtc

for users to dismiss or attackers to spoof. Could that one be moved to /etc/dtc, please? Thanks, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk

Bug#644496: duplicity: Can't restore a single file with --file-to-restore

Here is a little more info. I think that I have encountered a similar problem and in my case, I believe it was because I had got in a muddle with GPG keys in the initial setup, then corrected it after the first full backup, so the backup chain was not all using the same key. It does seem to be a

Bug#388141: Handling the copyright mess of the website

for material on the website if asked, so long as the previous licence(s) also held. Hope that informs, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk

Bug#607839: Question about GNOME Trademark and GNOME project packages in Debian

Joerg Jaspert wrote: We feel that it is infeasible for Debian to be in complete compliance with the current GNOME trademark license. [...] OK, sorry if this is an old chestnut, but do we actually need a licence in general? Is most of the use in Debian more than honest description of the source

Bug#436212: closed by Simon Paillard spaill...@debian.org (Re: Bug#436212: 64 Studio should be listed at misc/children-distros)

Thank you for fixing this. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Bug#616359: dtc-common: install script left server incompletely configured after upgrade

Package: dtc-common Version: 0.29.17-1+lenny1 Severity: normal After installing the security update for DSA-2179-1, the control panel was not working (some php missing file error that I did not note - sorry), so I ran /usr/share/dtc/admin/install/install and it failed with the output ending: ===

Bug#614390: cmake provides files under proprietary license

Modestas Vainius wrote: this bug is serious (i.e. the file is not shippable), isn't it? Problematic copyright notice is below. The copyright notice is false (the confidentiality has been broken) but I see no permission to distribute, so your claim seems correct. Hope that helps, -- MJR/slef

Bug#515200: Providing an openssl-linked pycurl

Guido Trotter wrote: According to my understandment: - OpenSSL is released under a license which is GPL incompatible, unless an exception to the GPL is used in the software compiled with it. Debian cannot distribute GPL software released under the unmodified GPL and linked against

Bug#186958: koha: changing back from ITP to RFP

retitle 186958 ITP: koha -- Web-based library automation package owner 186958 ! thanks That was a really unhelpful automatic email, making work for busy developers. People over at koha-community.org are working on packaging right now. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to

Bug#357791: irc2html.scm: changing back from ITP to RFP

retitle 357791 ITP: irc2html.scm -- Convert IRC chat logs into valid HTML with valid CSS owner 357791 ! thanks That was a really unhelpful automatic email, making work for busy developers. This would be a fairly quick package, but I've not had time for it. I still intend to package it, when

Bug#571146: www.debian.org: add link to IBM Public License

Russ Allbery r...@debian.org Could you add a link to the IBM Public License 1.0 to www.debian.org/legal/licenses/? This license is used by Postfix and OpenAFS and has been accepted in Debian main since 2000. I suspect it didn't appear there because the name isn't distinctive and varies a bit

Bug#565884: Please include CeCILL* licenses in common-licenses

Thibaut Paumard suggested: there is a growing body of packages (or at least files) under [1]CeCILL license in the archive. [...] [1] http://www.cecill.info/licences.en.html Roughly how many packages/files are under the licence? CeCILL Article 5.3.4 states The Licensee can include a code that

Bug#553336: dtc-common: Unable to set shared_renewal_shutdown from dtcadmin web

and related places and send a patch when we can. Hope that's OK, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster and LMS developer at | software www.software.coop http://mjr.towers.org.uk| co IMO only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html | op -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist

Bug#558802: dtc-common: always sends emails

Package: dtc-common Version: 0.29.17-1 Severity: wishlist Tags: patch There does not seem to be an option to switch off the renewal email reminders, which is desirable on shared hosting servers. The attached patch adds the feature for shared hosting, where a zero-size reminder message file in

Bug#553336: dtc-common: Unable to set shared_renewal_shutdown from dtcadmin web

Package: dtc-common Version: 0.29.17-1 Severity: important I think shared_renewal_shutdown may be unreachable through the dtcadmin web. I expected it to be in /usr/share/dtc/admin/inc/dtc_config.php function drawRenewalsConfig. Is it somewhere else? If not, would that be the right place to

Bug#532456: Are these licenses DFSG?

cate wrote: Eugen Dedu wrote: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=532456, about licenses I think there is a problem in terminology. AFAIK (but IANAL), the any use doesn't include distribution of software. For this reason I think it is safe to classify it as non distributable,

Bug#547698: Fixed in SID

Thomas Goirand tho...@goirand.fr wrote: If I'm not mistaking, this has been fixed on the 0.30.x series of DTC. Please upgrade to it, our Lenny repository at GPLHost has this version and the necessary dependency back-ported: deb ftp://ftp.gplhost.com/debian lenny main That contradicts the

Bug#547698: dtc-common: spelling mistake in new ticket notifications

Package: dtc-common Version: 0.29.17-1 Severity: minor Tags: patch The email for A customer has submitted a support ticket says hostingame instead of hostname. -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0.2 APT prefers stable APT policy: (500, 'stable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel:

Bug#545047: tasksel: iamerican and ibritish are no longer standard, readjust language tasks as needed.

Christian Perrier bubu...@debian.org wrote: [...] Another option would be dropping the british task and use iamerican and ibritish in a general english task (after all, is it correct to only have iamerican for en_IN, en_AU or en_ZA?) As I understand it, en_AU and en_NZ use words from both

Bug#543531: dtc-common: MX records in uppercase not allowed

Package: dtc-common Version: 0.29.17-1 Severity: minor It is not possible to enter MX records in uppercase. The data entry page for DNS and MX silently deletes them. The DNS RFCs often user uppercase as examples, so this is probably a bug. -- System Information: Debian Release: 5.0.2 APT

Bug#517790: mydns -- DNS server using MySQL or PostgreSQL for data storage

It looks like this package would be based on MyDNS-ng, rather than MyDNS. That is a good thing. Would it be based on the old packaging removed after http://bugs.debian.org/382656 ? I have an only-updated git tree of that which builds 1.2.8.27 with lots of lintian warnings that should be fixed

Bug#537117: libdbix-searchbuilder-perl: attempts to lower() timestamps on postgresql

Package: libdbix-searchbuilder-perl Version: 1.54-1 Severity: normal I upgraded a system to lenny and many rt ls searches stopped working. Viewing the logs discovered that request-tracker3.6 command line client was resulting in a call to lower() on a timestamp, which isn't a common function in

Bug#535830: ITP: php-recaptcha -- reCAPTCHA is a free CAPTCHA service

Angel Abad \(Ikusnet SLL\) an...@grupoikusnet.com wrote: [...] No computer program can read distorted text as well as humans can, so bots cannot navigate sites protected by CAPTCHAs. This sentence is false. It depends on the ability of the humans. Also, many other sorts of CAPTCHAs exist

Bug#414398: Processed: Does this bug still exist?

Rene Engelhard r...@debian.org wrote: [...] I'd close the bug then EXCEPT that I am not sure what is correct hyphenation for o'clock? none? o'-clock like OOo with openoffice.org-hyphenation-en-us on lenny does? I believe o'clock should not be hyphenated. Neither the Collins nor (as far as I

Bug#524835: ITP: thaifonts-siampradesh -- Thai TrueType fonts derived from DIP/SIPA contested fonts

Theppitak Karoonboonyanan t...@linux.thai.net wrote: * License : OFL-alike, with written notification requirement (see below) I believe this font is postcard-ware, so does not follow the DFSG, so cannot be part of debian. cc'ing debian-legal to check. * License: Font Computer

Bug#524835: ITP: thaifonts-siampradesh -- Thai TrueType fonts derived from DIP/SIPA contested fonts

because I was avoiding the OFL-fu and didn't understand editing it could possibly change the postcard clause. MJ Ray wrote: While not a DFSG problem, I think it's misleading to call this cooperative font creation when the sale restriction limits economic participation and the notification

Bug#521448: gammu: gnapplet.sis requires packages which are not in our archive (was: distributing precompiled binaries)

clone 521448 -1 retitle -1 p3nfs: applet build requires packages which are not in debian stop Michal Čihař ni...@debian.org wrote: MJ Ray m...@phonecoop.coop napsal(a): This email is to reopen bug 521448. As I understand the close message, while gammu's source does contain source code

Bug#521448: gammu: gnapplet.sis requires packages which are not in our archive (was: distributing precompiled binaries)

+0100 MJ Ray wrote: Francesco Poli wrote: It seems to me that bug #521448 is an attempt to report this [...] Reopen and retitle? [...] Could you please do that? [...] Done. Thanks for your time and hope this isn't too awkward to fix. Regards, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http

Bug#520840: ITP: wordpress-theme-inove -- WordPress theme iNove

License: Creative Commons What CC licence is being used? I found no reference to it on the URL given or in the download. Is this even CC? Thanks, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct --

Bug#389876: ITP: koha -- web-based library catalogue (ILS/OPAC)

) and as there are apparently 50MB of translation files, possible also seperate koha-language-ISO 639 packages. Yes, I'd agree with that split as a minimum. I'm open to suggestions about whether we want libkoha-perl and koha packages split or not. Hope that explains, -- MJ Ray (slef). LMS developer and supporter

Bug#517404: ITP: polyorb -- The PolyORB schizophrenic middleware for Ada

* URL : https://libre.adacore.com/polyorb/ * License : GMGPL Is that a typo? Looks like GNU GPL from here. Thanks, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE,

Bug#517346: ITP: openmeeg -- library and tools for solving EEG and MEG forward and inverse problems

* URL : http://www-sop.inria.fr/odyssee/software/OpenMEEG/ * License : CeCILL-B There is a concern that CeCILL-B contaminates other software (the debian websites) because of the advertising requirement in 5.3.4.3, as explained in

Bug#514984: ITP: getdata -- retrieval, updating and indexing of public data collections

* URL : http://wiki.debian.org/getData * License : AGPL http://wiki.debian.org/getData says:- distributed under the terms of the GNU Public License (GPL). The packager is also the copyright-holder, but this isn't a serving application, so I beg you not to change to

Bug#511613: ITA: libpam-pwgen -- a password generator

of the common DFSG-free licenses. Summarised from the emails by Paul Wise, Mark Weyer, Ben Finney and myself. Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ (Notice http

Bug#509546: www.debian.org: not suitable consultants list

Hi - I've been cc'd on the change request, but I thought I was told to leave it to the consultants team, so I'm not acting on it. Hope that's OK, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To

Bug#492696: Combining Artistic|GPL-1+ with GPL-2 and LGPL-3+

Damyan Ivanov d...@debian.org wrote: [Please Cc me on replies. Thanks] Most of the code is licensed under the same terms as Perl itself, [...] In addition to that, some icons are licensed under LGPL-3+, and some more icons are licensed under GPL-2. From how I understand it, if we choose

Bug#510493: RFC: licence of ITP: s3sync-ruby

Florian Weimer f...@deneb.enyo.de wrote: * MJ Ray: 3. is the licence any obstacle to meeting DFSG? It doesn't mention the act of running the program or using it. Or does this activity fall under display? The licence does mention using it, in Your use of this software code is at your own

Bug#510493: RFC: licence of ITP: s3sync-ruby

I hope no-one minds, but I'd like some smart analysis of this software's licence, so I'm asking debian-legal for their views. Please keep the Cc to the ITP report on replies. juanro...@gmail.com wrote: * Package name: s3sync-ruby * URL : http://s3sync.net/ * License :

Bug#509546: www.debian.org: not suitable consultants list

that they still work with debian. Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ (Notice http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html) tel:+44-844-4437-237 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email

Bug#509546: www.debian.org: not suitable consultants list

Hideki Yamane henr...@debian.or.jp wrote: On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 12:58:44 + MJ Ray m...@phonecoop.coop wrote: Just search with nihonlinux :) http://slashdot.jp/linux/article.pl?sid=02/10/29/1244228 # or ask DDs in slashdot.jp (ODSN, http://osdn.jp/). Should we stop linking to a debian

Bug#509164: libdatetime-format-sqlite-perl URL and license?

This module does not appear on URL : http://datetime.perl.org/ according to the search box on that site. Also, is the licence GPL+Artistic or as Perl? That's what I was trying to check. Thanks for any replies, -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please

Bug#508468: ITP: ssreflect -- small scale reflection extension for the Coq proof assistant

Stephane Glondu st...@glondu.net wrote: * Package name: ssreflect * URL : http://www.msr-inria.inria.fr/Projects/math-components * License : CeCILL-B RFC from debian-legal regarding the license:- I think we've consensus on software that uses CeCILL (upgradeable to GPL,

Bug#508249: ITP: libio-pager-perl -- pipe output to a pager if destination is a TTY

brian m. carlson sand...@crustytoothpaste.ath.cx wrote: On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 11:19:42AM +0200, Damyan Ivanov wrote: * License : other - Thou shalt not claim ownership of unmodified materials. - Thou shalt not claim whole ownership of modified materials. - Thou shalt grant the

Bug#508377: www.debian.org: broken link on Debian GNU/Hurd Development page

Jani Uusitalo j...@mummila.net wrote: On http://www.debian.org/ports/hurd/hurd-devel there's a link, labeled 'Development of the Hurd', which refers to http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/devel.html - this page doesn't exist on the server (it responds with a 404 - Page Not Found). New link

Bug#507873: CD vendors cleanup needed

Package: www.debian.org X-Debbugs-Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Forwarded: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm putting this report into the bug tracker so someone else can complete it before I do, if appropriate. Frank Lin

Bug#495721: AGPL and Debian

I'll only comment on point 1, the use fee, because I think others have answered the other questions and found solutions for the problem. Joerg Jaspert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We do not think that this is a severe enough problem to restrict the freeness of a work licensed using the AGPL. -

Bug#506977: FPC: copyright infringement in pre 2.2.2 sources

Paul Gevers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Could you help by explaining what needs to be done (if anything) with the current old-stable, stable and testing sources? It looks like we should take this seriously, but I fear this is slightly above my head. Especially the fact that upstream removed

Bug#506042: AGPL freeness bugs until #495721 is resolved

Just rounding off a few loose edges. Stopping for reasons explained near the end:- Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] MJ Ray wrote: For example, a PHPBB service page is about 20k, while PHPBB source is 2.19MiB. You have a mighty uninteresting forum if people only look

Bug#506609: axyl: code copy of Xinha ships the ImageManager plugin released under the PHP 2.02 licence

Francesco Poli [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I repeatedly stated my opinion on the PHP license and its unfixed issues: I personally think that the PHP License (up to version 3.01), fails to meet the DFSG, even for PHP itself! However I failed to gain consensus on debian-legal about the

Bug#506042: AGPL freeness bugs until #495721 is resolved

. As it was not a mistake, this bug is not serious, but the desire for some users to avoid unlimited download costs remains, so is it OK with you if I reopen this bug but downgrade it to wishlist? Thanks, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small worker cooperative http

Bug#495721: Progress on AGPLv3 concerns

There have been some changes in this. Firstly, the relevant FAQ has clarified some problems about whether servers must have the opportunity to download client source code; see http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.mobile.funambol.user/1391 Secondly, ftpmasters have a working opinion that AGPL

Bug#506042: AGPL freeness bugs until #495721 is resolved

Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2008-11-24 15:06:03.00 MJ Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As it was not a mistake, this bug is not serious, but the desire for some users to avoid unlimited download costs remains, so is it OK with you if I reopen this bug but downgrade

Bug#506609: axyl: code copy of Xinha ships the ImageManager plugin released under the PHP 2.02 licence

Raphael Geissert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -legal: can a final concensus be reached on whether this licence is DFSG-free? I'm happy to support http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/08/msg00128.html To summarise:- - unacceptable name approval restrictions for anything except PHP (DFSG 4); -

Bug#506042: AGPL freeness bugs until #495721 is resolved

Thomas Viehmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MJ Ray wrote: I thank you for your personal view (which will be useful for software where you are a licensor), but this is essentially the same anecdotal advocacy which has been covered in previous discussions about AGPLv3. Well, you should not have

Bug#505878: ITP: libfunambol-cpp-client-api -- unclarified AGPL

David Bremner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You might want to follow up on the thread in debian-legal http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2008/11/msg00046.html I understand someone from Funambol is following that thread. It would be nice to have some concensus about what, if any exceptions

Bug#506042: yocto-reader: infinite download liability for public use

Source: yocto-reader Version: 0.9.3 Severity: serious Justification: Policy 2.2.1 yocto-reader is under the AGPLv3 with no clarifications. Clause 13 of the AGPLv3 requires any hosting user to provide access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge to every visitor to the

Bug#505878: ITP: libfunambol-cpp-client-api -- unclarified AGPL

libfunambol-cpp-client-api appears to be under a plain AGPLv3. Clause 13 of the AGPLv3 requires hosting users to provide access to the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge to every visitor to the web pages generated by this software. If used to produce a public website, this

Bug#505253: Upstream uncontactable for one site...

[EMAIL PROTECTED] SMTP error from remote mail server after RCPT TO:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: host celiknet.com [212.175.105.24]: 550 5.1.1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] User unknown; rejecting Ouch. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Please follow

Bug#505253: www.debian.org: Logo page missing licenses

Alex Brotman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also meant the ones just above those two links, the Power By images. Here are some more buttons that have been made for Debian: The images are hosted on the debian servers, but there is no license associated with them. I believe those images hosted

Bug#501121: jd: package description inadequate

out at me. Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ (Notice http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html) tel:+44-844-4437-237 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED

Bug#437842: lists.debian.org: request creation of a debian-mediation mailing list

Lucas Nussbaum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Context: the creation of a debian-mediation@ mailing list is requested in #437842. I support the proposal. [...reasons...] I support the proposal if:- exempt of banning and other abuse commonly seen in when these issues are handled in other debian

Bug#496346: openarena: contains lcc, which is not free software

Peter De Wachter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OpenArena contains a copy of the lcc compiler in the code/tools/lcc directory, which does not seem free software as it does not allow commercial distribution. I agree. The early parts make it look like a BSD-style licence, but the license part

Bug#496659: Genicorp General Public Licence

Maximilian Gaß [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm currently packaging libopenoffice-oodoc-perl and stumbled upon its license: This software is free software. It is subject to the terms and conditions of both - the GNU Lesser General Public Licence, version 2.1, of the

Bug#496659: Genicorp General Public Licence

with LGPL+$anything it would be acceptable for main. The original French http://search.cpan.org/src/JMGDOC/OpenOffice-OODoc-2.103/LICENCE.FR says neither both nor either, but my understanding is that such a list would usually be read as both. I hope you're right, though. Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray

Bug#488436: www.debian.org: debian.org redirecto to www.en.debian.org

instead of the generic www.debian.org. OK. That's not what the bug report said (see Subject). I see later email from Josip Rodin about this, so I'll bow out now. Thanks for your help, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small worker cooperative http

Bug#488206: Which Esperanto translation should we use for eject debconf message?

is less confusing, because output appears in other situations in computing and it's closer to the msgid literally. Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster for hire, statistician and online shop builder for a small worker cooperative http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ (Notice http

Bug#460591: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

Giancarlo Niccolai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MJ Ray wrote: Anyway, this is the show-stopper. Contaminates other software. DFSG 9. It's the parts of FPL sections 1, 2 and 5 about Scripts. Clear enough? Yes, your position is now clear, thanks. Yet, I can't see why you say

Bug#469256: kexec-tools: Please use a boolean question with debconf

Christian Perrier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You might need to explain us in more details what is a kexec'able kernel. I think I would write either kexec-enabled or kexec-ready, depending on whether it is the kernel that can kexec, or the kernel to be loaded by kexec, respectively. Hope that

Bug#460591: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

Giancarlo Niccolai [EMAIL PROTECTED] skribis: MJ Ray wrote: [...] In general, I'm disappointed to see this licence proliferation. I am too. There isn't any single open source mainstream programming language or even compiler I know, including clisp, gcc, PHP, python, swi-prolog, ruby

Bug#460591: Falcon P.L. license (ITP:Bug#460591)

Giancarlo Niccolai [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] The license is tightly based on Apache 2, with extra clarifications and permissions. [...] Summary: I believe that any interpreter under this Falcon P.L. licence will contaminate other software and so fail DFSG 9. Also, I think the licence

Bug#388141: Discussions elsewhere

These two bugs are being discussed by DPL candidates after http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2008/03/msg00065.html and the current DPL has been asked the current status by an SPI board member, as reported in http://lists.spi-inc.org/pipermail/spi-general/2008-March/002538.html One candidate's

Bug#468765: # of supported packages (was Re: Is oldstable security support duration something to be proud of?)

Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 11 Mar 2008, MJ Ray wrote: I'm proud about the work that's been done, but I'm not proud that 3.1 has security support for only a year after 4.0 was released. You yourself may not be, but some of us still are. Again, if there are enough people

Bug#468765: # of supported packages (was Re: Is oldstable security support duration something to be proud of?)

Don Armstrong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] If there are serious numbers of developers and contributors who don't feel proud about the work that's been done, then they should voice support for some modification to the text. [...] Sorry, but that's a misleading requirement. I'm proud about

Bug#463553: www.debian.org: partners/ Black Cat Networks have ceased ops?

Package: www.debian.org Tags: help http://www.debian.org/partners/ includes Black Cat Networks and links to http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ which says Black Cat Networks are pleased to announce that RapidSwitch have taken over running all our services. All sales and support enquiries for

Bug#452387: Misleading statement in debian-faq s1.5, was: Ideas about a GR to fix the DAM

BTS for the debian-faq [please trim submit from followups]. Please resend to anyone else calling the debian project a cooperative. Regards, -- MJ Ray http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html tel:+44-844-4437-237 - Webmaster-developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, consumer and workers co

Bug#450945: mydns: new upstream with new version may solve memory problems

-Depends due to cidr.c:21 wanting +pgtypes_timestamp.h + + -- MJ Ray (Debian) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:06:34 + + mydns (1:1.1.0-7) unstable; urgency=low * Added new translations, l10n-only update diff -ruN mydns-1.1.0/debian/control mydns-1.2.4/debian/control --- mydns

Bug#447712: Package could be non-free in the United Kingdom

Lars Wirzenius [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ti, 2007-10-23 kello 09:44 -0500, Steve Greenland kirjoitti: But the license on the package itself doesn't make that restriction. If I have understood things correctly, in England (and the rest of the UK?) the copyright is owned by the crown and

Bug#444958: listarchives: please remove pharma spam message

Package: listarchives Severity: normal The following message: http://lists.debian.org/debian-apache/2005/05/msg00105.html is spam. Since it predates the addition of the spam-reporting feature to our list archives, though, I cannot use the newer means of reporting this message. This particular

Bug#442216: courier: Extra capitalization in debconf templates' short descriptions

way! I'm channeling Blair! Coming next: regime change.) Regards, -- MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op. Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke

  1   2   3   >