[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add keepassx.
From: |
Mathieu Lirzin |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add keepassx. |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:33:04 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux) |
Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> writes:
> Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> * gnu/packages/password-utils.scm (keepassx): New variable.
[...]
>> +(define-public keepassx
>> + (package
>> + (name "keepassx")
>> + (version "2.0-beta2")
^^^
Any reason why you don't choose the stable version 0.4.3 ? If it builds
correctly on guix, we should use it instead and change the name of this package
definition to "keepassx-2".
>> + (source
>> + (origin
>> + (method url-fetch)
>> + (uri (string-append "https://github.com/keepassx/keepassx/archive/"
>> + version ".tar.gz"))
>> + (sha256
>> + (base32 "0ljf9ws3wh62zd0gyb0vk2qw6pqsmxrlybrfs5mqahf44q92ca2q"))))
Guix lint is complaining about bad filename for the tarball, can you add this?
(file-name (string-append name "-" version ".tar.gz"))
>> + (description " [...] You can put all your passwords in
>> one database, which is locked with one master key or a thumb-drive. You only
>> have to remember one single master password or insert the thumb-drive to
>> unlock the whole database. [...] ")
This two sentences seems redundant, what about something like this?
"You can put all your passwords in one database, which is locked with one
master key or a key-file which can be stored on an external storage device."
>> + (license (list license:gpl2 license:gpl3))))
'COPYING' indicate this.
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation, either version 2 or (at your option)
version 3 of the License.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
And in 'LICENSE.GPL-3' you can find the "or later" so I think it's ok to
indicate
only "license:gpl3+" like this
;; Non functional parts use various licences.
(license license:gpl3+)
Can you send an updated patch?
Thanks for your contribution,
--
Mathieu Lirzin