[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Review of overkill: https://savannah.gnu.o

From: Sebastian Gerhardt
Subject: Re: [Savannah-hackers-public] Review of overkill:
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 08:59:29 +0100

Hi Mario,

thanks for your help in reviewing projects.

> "0verkill is a deathmatch-like action game for computers without pixel
> graphics and text mode users.". It is under GPL 2+. Some files has
> been took from zlib and say "For conditions of distribution and use,
> see copyright notice in zlib.h" but zlib.h is not included in
> overkill. Most files in the subdirectories lacks the licence notiece.

Right, good catch.
Especially the media files (including the .avi) need licensing and
copyright information. I usually ask the maintainer to put a text file
in every such directory listing all media files with copyright&license
info to address this.

> As a minor detail the directory inside the tarball is named "0verkill"
> (With zero) and the project name is "overkill" (With the 'O' letter).

I think this is for technical reasons as Savannah project names can't
start with a number. So I wouldn't mind.

> There is several very concerning .dst files who say "# Microsoft
> Developer Studio Project File - Name="Server" - Package Owner=<4>
> [...]", i do not know if it is legal to inclde that files, but it is
> not a good example to use private tools to make a free program.

"private tools"? Did you mean "proprietary"? 
To decide about this, I would check whether two conditions are met:
a) The project builds and runs on Free Software platform preferably
GNU/Linux, with free tools, without caveats in performance or features
compared to the proprietary. Judging from the included Makefiles, I
think this is the case here.

b) The project files are Free Software itself. This means the user has
the right to modify, distribute, ... them. So either the user can easily
create such files by himself because they are auto-generated, or these
files have license information included. (Like the Makefile does.)

If in doubt about this, we should ask the maintainer for clarification


I suggest you post an answer you WOULD give as a Savannah team member on
this mailing list for us to cross check, together with your conclusion
whether this project should be approved or needs work. So we can have a
another look on the answer before it gets posted on the tracker. 
(As you have seen, people tend to take everything that gets written on
the tracker as official Savannah team statements.)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]