[Debian-med-packaging] spades_3.6.2+dfsg-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

[Sascha Steinbiss]

Hi again,

>> On Sun, Feb 07, 2016 at 01:00:16PM +0000, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
>>> please review your debian/copyright. Especially in ext/* I found lots of
>>> files with missing licenses (GPL-3, MIT, Apache-2 ...).
>> 
>> I could either decide to work down this or work on the EDAM-DebTags
>> issue here in my last hours of Debian Med sprint.  I admit I feel my
>> time better spent with the latter and so I'll leave this for you
>> (Sascha, Afif?).
> 
> I will look at the licenses now that I have some time to kill at the airport.

I’ve worked my way through ext/, which really is a zoo of a lot of stuff that should IMHO better be packaged separately or linked to Debian’s own copies. Is this necessary now or can we do this later (just to get spades out)?

Another look at src/ is needed IMHO, but I need to go now so maybe later...

Cheers
Sascha
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-med-packaging/attachments/20160207/73282a7f/attachment.sig>