[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory? -- urgent and imp
From: |
David Hedlund |
Subject: |
Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory? -- urgent and important |
Date: |
Fri, 20 Jul 2018 22:47:35 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/52.8.0 |
On 2018-07-20 21:33, John Sullivan wrote:
> Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]]
>> [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]]
>> [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]]
>>
>> > >> I think it should be ok to put in the fsd without a copy of the
>> license
>> > >> if there is a clear statement of the intended license. But I would
>> like
>> > >> to hear John's opinion.
>> > > I'd like to hear Donald's and Stallman's opinions first and foremost:
>> > > * Can Directory entries be approved if the non-trivial source code
>> files
>> > > lack license notices.
>>
>> Yes, if that is the ONLY problem, the package can be listed.
>>
>> > > * Can Directory entries be approved if source code lacks a license file
>> > > in the root directory?
>>
>> My first inclination is to say no to them, but if that would mean rejecting
>> some important package that we really want to list, then we should think
>> about
>> it further.
>>
>> Maybe it is easy to get that problem fixed, since fixing it is not much work.
>> If so, we should first try to get them fixed.
> Yes, I think part of the benefit of the Directory work is getting people
> to fix problems like this.
>
> David, if there is no copy of the license anywhere in the repository, we
> should not add it before taking a closer look, because that may be a
> license violation.
>
> -john
>
* Should I extend the script to look for repositories now as well? There
are about 11 000 WebExtensions for Firefox 60 at this writing, and
repository link are not included in the API JSON files for them. That
means that I have to manually add them to custom register.
* Should I re-implement the option in FreeAMO to download each add-on
and look for a license file in the root directory?
* Can the FSF discuss this ASAP so I can finish FreeAMO during my
internship?
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license files and notices mandatory?, (continued)
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license files and notices mandatory?, David Hedlund, 2018/07/15
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license files and notices mandatory?, Marcin Cieslak, 2018/07/15
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license files and notices mandatory?, Richard Stallman, 2018/07/18
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license files and notices mandatory?, David Hedlund, 2018/07/18
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license files and notices mandatory?, Richard Stallman, 2018/07/18
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license files and notices mandatory?, David Hedlund, 2018/07/19
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license files and notices mandatory? - Adblock Plus analysis, David Hedlund, 2018/07/20
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license files and notices mandatory?, Richard Stallman, 2018/07/20
Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory?, Richard Stallman, 2018/07/08
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory?, John Sullivan, 2018/07/20
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory? -- urgent and important,
David Hedlund <=
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory? -- urgent and important, Richard Stallman, 2018/07/22
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory? -- urgent and important, bill-auger, 2018/07/23
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory? -- urgent and important, Richard Stallman, 2018/07/23
- Re: [directory-discuss] Are license notices mandatory? -- urgent and important, David Hedlund, 2018/07/24