[Pkg-puppet-devel] in need of a little help for packaing puppet development kit with all dependencies

Georg Faerber georg at debian.org
Thu Feb 13 23:52:11 GMT 2020

(Dear Ruby team, there is a question below directed at you -- sorry for


On 20-02-12 18:28:39, Gabriel Filion wrote:
> I'm planning on sending in three more soonish: tty-screen, tty-reader
> and tty-prompt.

All uploaded to NEW.

> Some more might actually also be kind of easy but I'll have to
> confirm/discuss the package names with the ruby team wrt the presence
> of a shipped cli script/"binary".

What's the question here, specifically? "What name should be used, if a
Ruby lib ships a binary"? If so, I'm not sure there is a general team
policy on this. I guess the current practice looks something like "if
the lib is mainly a lib, ruby-$foo is used, if it's more an application,
it should be $foo".

> one of the remaining ones might get a wee bit tricky:
> >>     |-> ruby-spdx-licenses -> *not present* in debian. must package
> this thing ships a json file that was taken from spdx.org, so we'll
> have to make sure to find the appropriate licence for this file.
> I *think* from what I could find on spdx.org that the file is covered
> by CC-BY-SA 3.0
> but then, I'm not sure if using the name "SPDX" in the package name
> and description requires the use of a mention of the registered
> trademark on the name.

I'm by no means an expert on all this licensing stuff, but the above
sounds painful. I'm wondering, if we really need this one, or a able to
patch it trivially and drop it. I didn't check the code, yet, for this.


More information about the Pkg-puppet-devel mailing list