>
> It is not actually a bug to specify GPL-2.0, as both GPL-2 and GPL-2.0
> are acceptable. I'd say otherwise, scripts Ian mentioned that do not
> support GPL-2.0 are buggy, and the format specification requires the
> dot-zero version number to be accepted as well.
>
Thanks for the clarification
On 25 December 2015 at 11:04, Peter Spiess-Knafl wrote:
> Thanks for reviewing and considering to sponsor pkgdiff.
> I changed 2.0 to 2. The ".0" is appended automatically if you use
> dh_make for an initial template. Should I report a bug about this
> to devscripts?
It is not actually a bug to s
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 11:04:05AM +0100, Peter Spiess-Knafl wrote:
> Thanks for reviewing and considering to sponsor pkgdiff.
> I changed 2.0 to 2. The ".0" is appended automatically if you use
> dh_make for an initial template. Should I report a bug about this
> to devscripts?
I think this
Hi Iain!
Thanks for reviewing and considering to sponsor pkgdiff.
I changed 2.0 to 2. The ".0" is appended automatically if you use
dh_make for an initial template. Should I report a bug about this
to devscripts?
I reuploaded it to mentors and also pushed the changes to git.
Thanks again
Peter
Hi,
This package is not yet ready for upload, but it's almost there.
In debian/copyright, please change GPL-2.0 and GPL-2.0+ to just GPL-2 and
GPL-2+ so that utilities that scan these files for these shortnames will
pick them up.
Once you've made that change, I would be happy to sponsor the uplo
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist
Dear mentors,
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pkgdiff". It is an
alternative version of diffoscope and is a required depndency for
abi-tracker [1], which I plan to bring to Debian.
* Package name: pkgdiff
Version : 1
6 matches
Mail list logo
