clicompanion-devs team mailing list archive

[Jonathan Marsden <jmarsden@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/17/2011 02:23 AM, bdfhjk wrote:

> 1. I contacted naesk, but please refer to
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/clicompanion/+bug/608653
> 
> Licence must be GPL, because it use GPL elements.


You can *never* guess or imply copyright and licence information.
Debian must *know* what the creator of the file released it as.  How do
you know that naesk did not pay the original creator of the "elements"
for commercial rights to those images, then combine them in an artistic
way, and then place the result under some other licence?

How does Debian know naesk did not do that?  It cannot possibly know,
unless the creator of the work (naesk) clearly specifies the copyright
and licence terms under which that work is published.

Therefore, until the author provides that information (a gpg-signed
email would be fine), the work has unknown licence and copyright status
and so cannot be included in Debian.

> 2. About the man page -
> 

> " This documenmtation was written by: (...) ". So it isn't list of

> authors clicompanion, only authors man page.


Right.  But, unless these two documentation authors re-assigned the
copyright of that man page to Duane or Kenny (which I do not think they
did), then the copyright of that man page belongs to its authors.  If it
is copyrighted by them, then debian/copyright needs to say that,
otherwise it is not correct.

Right now, debian/copyright says all the files in the source tree are
copyrighted by Duane and Kenny.  My point is that this is incorrect.
So, as part of packaging clicompanion for Debian, you need to fix
debian/copyright so that it is accurate for all files in the package.

> We should add here all authors of Clicompanion?


What for?  How is this relevant to the copyright of the man page?

We should make sure that debian/copyright specifies the copyright
owner(s) of every file being distributed, and the licence that those
copyright owners released each file under.

> 3. We still working and review isn't completed.


How long are you planning to freeze the trunk of both application code
and packaging (you asked for a freeze recently, because you were about
to release and about to get a package ihto Debian, somehow
simultaneously)??

Why would you freeze both trees, if your review is not done yet?  This
makes no sense, and is very inconvenient for others.  Please use a
branch for your work, so the trunk does not have to be frozen unnecessarily.

If you do not know how to use branches, then ask for help with that.

Jonathan