[Top][All Lists]

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

[Savannah-register-public] [task #14778] Submission of TutoTerm

From: Ineiev
Subject: [Savannah-register-public] [task #14778] Submission of TutoTerm
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 11:41:34 -0500 (EST)
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:41.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/41.0

Follow-up Comment #16, task #14778 (project administration):

> I checked each single manually created file in my archive, I used the
> "gnueval" program to double check [0] and I reread the files listed by
> Svetlana (thank you for your help).

Thank you both!

> This led to these observations/modifications:
> ./ABOUT-NLS comes from Gettext, it have been automatically
> generated,

Some parts of it were hand-written, and they are copyrightable.

> I see no reason for me to own it.

I'm not quite sure what 'own' means. I perceive it as
a bug of Gettext that affects your package.

It's you who release a tarball, so you are fully responsible for every
file in it: what if you use a tool that adds proprietary files to your
tarball? Who else is in the position to make sure that such things
can't happen?

When a tarball contains files without proper copyright and license
notices, it is technically undistributable; then, Savannah download
area is automatically mirrored, so those who release undistributable
files impose legal risks on mirror maintainers.

> ./po/Makevars also comes from Gettext

Another bug: bug #52227.

> ./po/fr.po comes from xgettext, I see no reason to modify its header
> (it is left as is in most packages which use Gettext).

We are not discussing what most packages do, we are discussing what
Savannah policies require. I admit I may misunderstand something,
though, so I'm willing to listen to your interpretation.

> I just added my email address.

Could you point out the advantages of not including a full license
notice and referring to it instead?

I can think of two ones:

* it reduces the comments in the header (this doesn't seem essential to me);
* it makes it easier to relicense the package: the translations are
automatically preserved, and only the consent of other authors are needed; I'm
not sure if it's really good or bad.

> ./ comes from autoheader, again, nobody never modify this
> kind of files.

It is _generated_ by autoheader, and it says so. I think it may be
actually uncopyrightable.

> ./TAGS was useless, I deleted it.

Good idea.

> ./data/README did contain a valid notice.

Yes, it did; although it was redundant for the files it listed,
and in fact, ./data/README itself is unneeded.

> ./po/ChangeLog was automatically generated, but I still added a
> notice to it
> ./po/ seems trivial to me, but I still added a notice.

Will these notices persist after you add something to your package
and run autoreconf?

> ./po/LINGUAS is trivial.

Agreed; what about ./data/icon/tutoterm.png?


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

reply via email to

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