On Sun, 10 Dec 2017 12:44:52 -0600, Steve Robbins wrote:
> However, the consensus voiced in this thread (as was the case of the same in
> 2016) is that while license summarizing (which can include, if the license
> has
> language such as Russ identified, also listing copyrights) is valuable,
>
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 11:24:45AM +0100, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> The SELinux policy could be altered to either run everything that we know is
> not ready to be confined in an unconfined domain or put that domain in
> permissive (which would result in a lot of denials being logged), so it's
> p
On Sunday, December 10, 2017 8:09:16 PM CST Chris Lamb wrote:
> However, I just wanted to add that whilst I can understand the frustration
> of your package being rejected after spending some time in NEW, it would
> be unfair to characterise that as "leaving" or neglecting it. Attributing
> malice
Hi Steve,
> It's a shame the FTP masters are not participating in the discussion.
I apologise. I have been following reading this thread, but just not
responding as I can't commit the time right now to seriously respond
to any input of my own.
However, I just wanted to add that whilst I can un
Hi Ian,
As a preface to my comments: I am *only* complaining about collecting
copyright notices. I agree that collecting together a comprehensive license
statement(s) is necessary. The caveats of Russ Alberry [1] aside, these are
two distinct tasks in my eyes.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/de
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Emmanuel Bourg
* Package name: plexus-languages
Version : 0.9.5
Upstream Author : The Apache Software Foundation
* URL : https://github.com/codehaus-plexus/plexus-languages
* License : Apache-2.0
Programming Lang: Java
6 matches
Mail list logo
