On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 08:39:48AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
>
> The bigger problem for entering Debian is what Andreas mentions, that
> the software uses Qt4 instead of Qt5. Once you have released a new
> version that uses Qt5 it could potentially enter Debian.
To be correct: Version 0.9.4 in
It looks like this bug went from "Qt4->Qt5" to "no longer DFSG-free."
On Fri, 10 Jan 2020 17:34:35 +0100
Eric Maeker wrote:
> Oh! There is a misunderstanding here!
> Let me correct my words:
> -> full code of each stable released version is packaged and freely
> available (but undocumented
Oh! There is a misunderstanding here!
Let me correct my words:
-> full code of each stable released version is packaged and freely
available (but undocumented since v1.0.0).
Code is considered 100% stable (and released) when :
- it perfectly passes every the unit-tests in debug mode with MacOs,
If the package is available under the GPL, it strikes me that requiring any
non-trivial approval to obtain source under that license would not be
allowed. If the form is just a check box verifying that you have received
object code, maybe, but this sounds like it may be a license violation. Can
we
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 07:45:34AM -0500, Daniel Hakimi wrote:
> Can you please clarify -- you said the license was the same, but you didn't
> say what that license actually was. What license is your code available
> under?
GPL-3+ [1]
BTW, I think if a Debian package is published the requirement
5 matches
Mail list logo
