Bug#724920: Bug#725661: pu: opencv/2.3.1+dfsg-1

[Cyril Brulebois]

Control: tag -1 wheezy moreinfo

Hi,

Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <iwamatsu at debian.org> (2013-10-07):
> Package: release.debian.org
> Severity: normal
> User: release.debian.org at packages.debian.org
> Usertags: pu
> 
> I'd like to propose an upgrade of opencv.
> 
> opencv distributed in wheezy includes source code of non-free (#724920).
> I want to solve this problem.
> Source code of the target is the code for test. It does not affect the actual working.
> 
> I attached debdiff. Could you consider this change suitable for stable-proposed-updates?

(for the records, we usually prefer when bugs are fixed in testing /
unstable before considering updates in stable.) Anyway, if the files
indeed got relicensed under a suitable license, why should they get
removed from an earlier release? At best we could ship a package with
updated headers and licensing info to reflect the facts all those files
are actually OK?

Mraw,
KiBi.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/attachments/20131007/6e832fc3/attachment.sig>