[Debian-med-packaging] Comments regarding pixelmed_20130426-1_amd64.changes

[Mathieu Malaterre]

Hi,

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Paul Tagliamonte <paultag at debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:05:28PM +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
>> Paul,
>>
>>   Could you please clarify why this is an issue ?
>
> It's not, really. That's why this is a PROD rather than a REJECT :)
>
> In fact, some F/OSS Licenses usually contain such a string. The issue,
> as Russ pointed out, is that they took the time to put a license header
> on each file, but failed to clarify the terms; which makes me wonder if
> it was a mistake (or so on).
>
> Since I'm *not* sure, and this may not be a problem I've PROD'd you to
> check with upstream, to ensure that this is licensed under the terms
> you've put in the d/copyright. Is that so?

I have checked with upstream, I am waiting on there answer. I am 100%
sure this was a mistake.

>>   All I could find is:
>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/03/msg00230.html
>> -> http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/10/msg00198.html
>>
>> Thanks much for the clarification !
>
> No problemo!
>
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Paul Richards Tagliamonte
>> <ftpmaster at ftp-master.debian.org> wrote:
>> > Hello, Maintainer,
>> >
>> >
>> > Could you please verify the folowing files are under the license noted
>> > in the copyright, please?
>> >
>> >   o com/pixelmed/web/package.html is "Copyright all rights reserved"
>> >      + favicon.ill - copyright adobie systems, all rights reserved
>
> btw; since I saw the mentors thread; this was a string I saw, again,
> just asking you to ensure this *is* free and clear to distribute.

I am pretty sure this is not. As per thread on debian-mentors at . But
cannot be solved ATM:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=717228

Would it be possible to accept the package as-is, to help the java7
migration. Meanwhile I'll fill in a bug report as per explanation:

http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/type1nondfsg

Regards,