[DRE-maint] ruby-dbm_1.1.0-1_amd64.changes is NEW

[Paul Tagliamonte]

I've marked this package for ACCEPT.

However, there's one borderline issue that I'm going to allow through
NEW, because I don't believe it impacts our distributability, however
it's likely an RC bug IMHO.

The debian/coypright file describes source files, not binaries. It
looks like you've added GPL-3+ because of the GDBM implementation we
link to, which is a welcome degree of diligence I do appreciate, but
it may change without the involvement of this source package (if the
implementation were to change, or how a downstream changes the way the
deb is built). If we had to list all the licensing information of all
our build-deps / links, things would get very messy indeed! I'd expect
someone to look through the dependency tree iff they need to determine
the binary distribution terms.

If you could upload a new version of this package with a fixed
d/coypright, that'd be super helpful!

I'll spare filing the bug since it's not in the archive yet, I trust
the team to update this before I have a chance to file a bug :)

I'm not rejecting because the correct terms are in fact there, and no
terms of the license would be violated by our distribution here from
how I'm seeing it. The license document is also clarified in a way
that's factual and understandable for a human to read.

  paultag (on behalf of the ftpteam)



On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 10:21 PM Antonio Terceiro <terceiro at debian.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Dec 31, 2022 at 01:09:44AM +0000, Debian FTP Masters wrote:
> > binary:ruby-dbm is NEW.
> > binary:ruby-dbm is NEW.
> > source:ruby-dbm is NEW.
>
> This package is needed ir order to fix dhelp:
>
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1027407
>
> It's also a very simple package, so if possible please try to expedite
> it through NEW.



-- 
:wq