Re: R packages licensed MIT but not shipping a copy of the MIT license itself, Re: R packages licensed MIT but not shipping a copy of the MIT license itself

, that the Debian source package conforms to > the license conditions (by always including the required text). So any > redistributor of Debian, or this component from Debian, will by default > not violate those conditions. cool. -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key:

Re: R packages licensed MIT but not shipping a copy of the MIT license itself, Re: R packages licensed MIT but not shipping a copy of the MIT license itself

[you forgot to CC me on this, anyway, I temporarly subscribed d-legal@] On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 07:52:18AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Mattia Rizzolo writes: > > > Yes, I see how the MIT license is DFSG-free. What I'm saying is that > > IMHO the only license requirement (

Re: R packages licensed MIT but not shipping a copy of the MIT license itself, Re: R packages licensed MIT but not shipping a copy of the MIT license itself

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 04:28:30PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Mattia Rizzolo writes: > > Based on http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT > > > > This is a template. Complete and ship as file LICENSE the following 2 > > lines (only) > > > > YEAR: > &

Re: R packages licensed MIT but not shipping a copy of the MIT license itself

chive), and there are 2 more in the RFS queue. Do you mind rejecting it in this case? source is r-cran-r6 (please write something meaningful on the reject notice, so that the sponsoree (which is the same of the other 2) will get some more background). -- regards, Mattia R

R packages licensed MIT but not shipping a copy of the MIT license itself

'path:debian/copyright License: MIT' in codesearch.d.n and grepping the results for packages named /r-cran/ -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. more about me: http://mapreri.org