r-cran-spdep_0.5-74-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

[Andreas Tille]

Hi Paul,

thanks a lot for grabbing this!

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 07:00:12PM +0000, Paul Richards Tagliamonte wrote:
> 
> Thorsten sent a mail, nothing back, not reprocessed;

Hmmm, nothing back is not correct - but I could understand that a lot of
mails might get into the way of ftpmaster and my be something got lost.
I have tried to discuss things with upstream and ftpmaster was always in
CC.

My last mail to ftpmaster was:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 11:04:15 +0200
From: Andreas Tille <andreas at an3as.eu>                                                                                                                                                   
To: Thorsten Alteholz <ftpmaster at ftp-master.debian.org>                                                                                                                                  
Cc: Debian Science Team <debian-science-maintainers at lists.alioth.debian.org>                                                                                                             
Subject: Re: Comments regarding r-cran-spdep_0.5-74-1_amd64.changes 

Hi Thorsten,

On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 12:50:48PM +0000, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
> ping?

pong?

I was waiting on some comments in the thread starting at

  http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/2014-July/026476.html

I have no idea what change you would accept for the d/copyright file and
was just idling waiting for some response from you.

Kind regards

        Andreas.

...
----------------------------------------------------------------------

> please re-upload if it's fit for the archive. Clearing
> in the meantime.

Clearing is fine but I simply do not know whether the discussion with
upstream was convincing that GPLv2+ applies.
 
> according to spdep/inst/README parts of src/soigraph.c are taken from
> a publication of Camebridge University Press. Can you please confirm
> that the license is really GPLv2+?
> 
> spdep/R/bptest.sarlm.R seems to be just GPLv2 and not GPLv2+, doesn't it?

Thanks for working on new queue

        Andreas.

PS: In new are hanging some "not new sources but new binaries" from
    Debian Med namely fis-gtm and orthanc.  May be these are some low
    hanging fruits for your cleaning work. 

Moreover the following packages are marking some end of a chain of
dependencies

  https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/r-bioc-annotate_1.46.0-1.html
  https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/r-cran-futile.options_1.0.0-1.html
  https://ftp-master.debian.org/new/r-cran-lambda.r_1.1.7-1.html

which are needed to upgrade some existing r-bioc-* packages which are
struck in the middle of the migration process from BioC 3.0 to 3.1.


-- 
http://fam-tille.de