[Debian-astro-maintainers] starjava-topcat_4.4-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

[Ole Streicher]

Hi Chris,

Am 11.04.2017 um 10:00 schrieb Chris Lamb:
> It seems there are patches with unreferenced copyright (or patches that change
> the copyright) under debian/patches. Please clarify the situation of these
> within debian/copyright. Many thanks :)

Could you be more specific here? All patches have a well-defined
copyright. Here is the full list:

* Remove-unneeded-reference-to-AstPackage.patch
  Remove-plastic-support.patch
  Remove-SOG-references.patch
  Remove-FitsReaderSpi.patch
  Remove-edu.jhu.htm-reference.patch
  Fix-build.xml-for-use-outside-of-starjava.patch
  Use-custom-BrowserLauncher.patch
  Fix-Icon-path-in-jhall.jar.patch
  Remove-references-to-xdoc-and-ttools.patch
  Adjust-classpath-in-topcat-script.patch
  Use-a-local-copy-of-the-XSLT-stylesheets-instead-of-xdoc.patch
  Don-t-call-home-for-new-version-by-default.patch
  Clearly-mark-this-version-as-Debian.patch
  Remove-GBIN-references.patch
  Make-CDF-optional.patch
  Remove-MIRAGE-references.patch
  Remove-references-to-SRB-and-MySpace.patch

These files are all generated by me, including the new files. They all
fall under the main section in d/copyright, which includes my own copyright.

* Add-XSLT-sheets-for-conversion-of-the-xml-documentation-t.patch

These files are taken from another subdirectory of the upstream github
repository; namely xdoc/. As such, they also fall under the original
copyright in the main section in d/copyright.

* Add-cds.tools.ExtApp.patch

This patch was originated by CDS and therefore has its own paragraph in
d/copyright.

I can't see a patch with an unclear license, and none of them changes
the copyright of an existing file. I would also not see that a problem
-- the sources we distribute in Debian are clearly the unchanged
upstream files and the Debian specific patches, and both have a clear
license.

Best regards

Ole