On 28/09/12 23:46, Guillem Jover wrote:
On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 22:50:10 +0100, Nicholas Bamber wrote:
On 28/09/12 21:55, Guillem Jover wrote:
As such, I'm going to be closing this request if there's no additional
feedback proposing a workable and elegant solution to this.
Thanks for
Nicholas Bamber wrote:
Techincally the shell script
fragments incorporated into Debian maintance scripts by debhelper may
fall into this category
For code that is licensed like so?
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted under any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 29/09/12 16:36, Joey Hess wrote:
Nicholas Bamber wrote:
Techincally the shell script fragments incorporated into Debian
maintance scripts by debhelper may fall into this category
For code that is licensed like so?
Redistribution and use
Hi,
Nicholas Bamber wrote:
Sorry yes I did not mean to imply that there was a copyright issue
with the inclusion of debhelper fragments in maintenance scripts, just
an example of techincally it might happen. The policy explicitly
mentions incorporating source code.
Based on
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.16.8
Severity: normal
When packaging from VCS with 3.0 (quilt) and single-debian-patch,
the debian/patches/debian-changes file generated has its entries
in random order (instead of normalised by ASCIIbetically sorting
the pathnames of the files containing diffs before
5 matches
Mail list logo
