On 12-Mar-14, at 4:57 PM, Helge Deller wrote:
On 03/12/2014 03:27 AM, John David Anglin wrote:
I also don't want to become a Qt developer. I have enough on my
plate with GCC and Linux.
Helge, do you have any thoughts about this?
I would be interested to come up with a good fix, and even submit it
via
the required CLA, but right now I'm pretty busy with so many things,
that
I don't want to take another one in addition.
Maybe in a few weeks.
This is also a busy time for me.
Helge, do you still have a CLA? If you don't, wouldn't you need to
get your
employer to apply? That might take time as it would probably require
legal
review.
I'm fully willing to make the contribution available under any "GNU
License Terms".
Or BSD-license? Would that help? (Maybe not because of the copyright
licensing?)
I have no objection to this approach and could try to send a signed
email on the
weekend. It's something I've never done before.
I don't understand the copyright situation for these files. It is my
understanding
that Helge contributed the code that is being removed in my patch.
The AVR32
header that is copied has a Digia copyright. Indeed, every file that
I looked at has
a Digia copyright.
It looks to me like it's best for me to continue to patch the binary
uploads given the Qt CLA.
Or alternatively if Debian could carry your patch until we get it
resolved
somehow in the future (either by me or you) ?
Dave
--
John David Anglin dave.ang...@bell.net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-qt-kde-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/blu0-smtp26f78f08ea2b4da4c2b36897...@phx.gbl
