Hi José L, Thanks for giving detailed information!
This explains it very well. Getting the licenses ok isn't always the easiest thing to do... I wish you good luck and I hope that we once again will see Qucs in the archive. Thanks a lot for the effort! Best regards, Ruben 2015-02-21 19:28 GMT+01:00 José Luis Redrejo Rodríguez <jredr...@debian.org>: > > > 2015-02-21 12:46 GMT+01:00 Ruben Undheim <ruben.undh...@gmail.com>: >> >> Hi, >> >> > I've just uploaded it to the archive >> >> I just saw this was written in October. As far as I can see, Qucs is >> not available in the Debian repository now. Is there anything holding >> it up? > > > > Yes, the sources contain some files which license is not acceptable by > Debian ftpmaster, so it has been rejected. > > > >> >> Which archive did you upload it too? >> >> I can see that there is a well maintained PPA for Ubuntu with packages >> in good state here: >> https://launchpad.net/~fransschreuder1/+archive/ubuntu/qucs >> >> Is there any reason why this package cannot enter Debian sid also >> soon. I'm impressed of how well Qucs has become. > > > > Yes, it is not a pure technical question. The package was ready, working and > lintian clean. > It 's a licensing problem. There are a bunch of files (mainly models) with > non-free licenses. I'm trying to clean them all, but qucs funcionality are > being reduced. > I'm trying to find a replacement to keep it all working. > Of course, the ppa package you say it's still worse in terms of licensing. I > had already removed the files I was sure that were not free, but ftpmasters > found some others. > > Regards > José L. > > > >> >> >> Best regards, >> Ruben > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
