On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 07:31:02PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
DEP-5 as defined in http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/ does not have any
clause allowing us to skip license entries for certain class of files.
In practice, many packages lack entries for autotools generated files
which come
Hi,
On 06/09/14 at 16:31 +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
Hi,
There was recent discussions on debian-dug-in list [1][2] on the content
of a mini debconf being planned in India during October 17 and 18.
The event is being organized in an engineering college with a good track
record of free
On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 02:12:21PM +0200, Robert Szeliga wrote:
for example if i do litlle change in debian distro instaling by defoult
other software, remove some package can i call then my own distro with my
logo, and put that operating system on my website and obtain the money from
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
You could always use the Files-Excluded field to make uscan remove
those files from the upstream tarball,
Too much work (at least when you are not repacking the tarball for other
reasons) for absolutely no gain.
Not sure how that's a
Obviously, consensus is that blobs were, and still are, essential for
Linux's status as a popular commercially viable OS.
I'm wondering at the same time if they are considered a necessary
evil, and wonder if there would be support [1] to try to work together
with vendors to free the firmware
Hi,
Le 09/09/2014 17:40, Michael Gilbert a écrit :
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
You could always use the Files-Excluded field to make uscan remove
those files from the upstream tarball,
Too much work (at least when you are not repacking the tarball for other
Osamu Aoki os...@debian.org writes:
It may be good to have a set of specifically defined file types for
exclusion in DEP-5 policy. Then we can skip listing them in the
copyright file. The helper script can generate a template for the
copyright file in line with the actual practice and not
Le Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 08:12:01PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
Quoting Osamu Aoki (2014-09-08 17:38:41)
DEP-5 as defined in http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/ does not have any
clause allowing us to skip license entries for certain class of files.
I believe the problem is not DEP-5
On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:40:46PM -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
You could always use the Files-Excluded field to make uscan remove
those files from the upstream tarball,
Too much work (at least when you are not repacking the tarball for other
reasons) for absolutely no gain.
Not sure how
9 matches
Mail list logo
