paravoid at debian.org
Thu Jul 2 16:49:39 UTC 2009
Nick Hilliard wrote:
> Yes, the copyright situation is not good. I've particularly been trying
> to get rid of code which is part copyright of IBM (the bulk of this is
> in the re2dfa library, which it may be possible to swap out with another
> library). Most of the rest is either GPL, RIPE NCC (BSD style) or USC
Hm, right, the IBM-copyrighted part is licensed only for non-commercial
purposes. That effectively means that we can't upload it to Debian's
main section, since it directly contradicts DFSG#6 ("no discrimination
against fields of endeavor"). Perhaps we could it make it to non-free
>> As the first step of cooperation, I'd like to learn about your release
>> plans. As I already said above, I'm planning on packaging the
>> cruft-cleanout branch; if I've understood correctly, this is going to
>> transform to the 5.0.0 release.
> That seems to be the consensus at the moment. I would expect that there
> will be a 5.0.0 release fairly shortly. Maybe in a couple of weeks.
>> What is your release schedule in general? Are you following a
>> stable/unstable versioning scheme? Do you plan on doing frequent or
>> infrequent releases?
> um, "yes" - definitely!
> Coming from a bsd background, I like the stable branch / unstable trunk
> way of doing things. But really, this is just a matter of naming. As
> regards frequency, I have no idea.
More information about the irrtoolset