minetest-mod-mobf_2.3.2-1_amd64.changes REJECTED

[Paul Tagliamonte]

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 09:11:46AM +0100, Martin Quinson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 04:00:20AM +0000, Paul Richards Tagliamonte wrote:
> > 
> > Howdy maintainer,
> > 
> > How did you figure out that this was CC-BY-SA 3.0? I
> > just see CC-BY-SA.
> 
> This is because http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/ points
> to a 404 page pointing to either version of the CC-BY-SA. So I
> understood upstream licence as 'pick the version number you like', as
> in a GPL3+. I'm not sure of what to do here.

Yeah, it's not a cut-and-dry - there's no such concept in CC-land, it'd
totally be worth ensuring that they picked 3.0 or later (those are the
DFSG free ones), a quick email never hurt (and add it to d/copyright if
you want to stave off the harassing ftpteam :) )

> > Please also get upstream to include the license text; not including
> > it is almost always a license violation.
> 
> Ok. That was to avoid the following linitan warning:
> W: minetest-mod-mobf: extra-license-file
> usr/share/games/minetest/mods/mobf/animal_big_red/License.txt
> W: minetest-mod-mobf: extra-license-file
> usr/share/games/minetest/mods/mobf/animal_chicken/License.txt
> W: minetest-mod-mobf: extra-license-file
> usr/share/games/minetest/mods/mobf/animal_cow/License.txt
> W: minetest-mod-mobf: extra-license-file
> usr/share/games/minetest/mods/mobf/animal_creeper/License.txt
> W: minetest-mod-mobf: extra-license-file
> usr/share/games/minetest/mods/mobf/animal_dm/License.txt
> W: minetest-mod-mobf: extra-license-file
> usr/share/games/minetest/mods/mobf/animal_vombie/License.txt
> W: minetest-mod-mobf: extra-license-file
> usr/share/games/minetest/mods/mobf/mob_npc/License.txt
> W: minetest-mod-mobf: extra-license-file
> usr/share/games/minetest/mods/mobf/mob_oerkki/License.txt
> W: minetest-mod-mobf: extra-license-file
> usr/share/games/minetest/mods/mobf/mob_slime/License.txt
> 
> Maybe lintian should check that the files are equals before warning
> about equality.

Oh, no, those are fine to get rid of; the license text should go in
d/copyright as the License: block - check out DEP5 for more info :)

> I will not remove them, and override lintian. If you agree, I will
> also bug lintian.

Removing the .txt from the binary package is fine, we should just have
the contents of the license in the d/copyright.

> 
> Thanks for your time,
> Mt

Thank you, Mt,
  Paul

-- 
 .''`.  Paul Tagliamonte <paultag at debian.org>  |   Proud Debian Developer
: :'  : 4096R / 8F04 9AD8 2C92 066C 7352  D28A 7B58 5B30 807C 2A87
`. `'`  http://people.debian.org/~paultag
 `-     http://people.debian.org/~paultag/conduct-statement.txt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-games-devel/attachments/20140105/a73f1303/attachment.sig>