On Friday 02 December 2016 16:53:53 Ian Jackson wrote:
> Pali Rohár writes ("Re: is igmpproxy dfsg compliant?"):
> > On Thursday 24 November 2016 19:29:21 Roberto wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > > And can be included igmpproxy package into Debian?
> > >
> > > Probably asking the authors if they can please switch the
> > > license, it will benefit not only Debian but anyone who
> > > downloads from upstream source as well.
> >
> > So... it is enough if all authors and contributors of igmpproxy
> > agree that their changes can be redistributed under GPLv2+?
>
> Yes.Done. Now I all authors and contributors of igmpproxy 0.1 agreed that their changes can be licensed under GPLv2+. I updated igmpproxy on https://mentors.debian.net/package/igmpproxy and included all licenses and agreements from emails into copyright file. I hope that now it is correct and finally GPLv2+ compatible. Can you review proposed package? -- Pali Rohár [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
