Bug#928099: RFS: shc/4.0.1 new upstream release

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#928099: RFS: shc/4.0.1 new upstream release

Tong Sun-4
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: normal

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "shc".

I've pushed it to Salsa:

  https://salsa.debian.org/debian/shc

The package was tested on both gbp and sbuild. It's also lintian-clean.

here is the build log:
https://paste.debian.net/1080285/

Could you please reviewing/sponsoring this?

Any kind of reviews and suggestions are appreciated.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#928099: Shc's License

Tong Sun-2
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 7:45 AM Tong Sun wrote:

>
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:40 AM Bart Martens wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 4:26 PM Tong Sun wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 8:05 AM Tong Sun wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 8:32 PM Tong Sun wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:24 AM Tong Sun wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 9:02 AM Tong Sun wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thx. I'll change the license to GPL-3+.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Bart,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do think the following change OK?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/shc/commit/933d1a533842e3ddaf3e79ac3e1580842f4fef12
> > > > >
> > > > > I've fixed the GPL thing:
> > > > > https://salsa.debian.org/debian/shc/blob/master/debian/copyright
> > > > >
> > > > > I double-checked when you asked me the GPL or LGPL question, but
> > > > > didn't find anything prompted your question myself.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway, the reason I'm asking whether you think the change was OK, is
> > > > > that I don't know how to properly express within the debian/copyright
> > > > > file that the original author, Francisco, was using GPL-2+ license,
> > > > > while new version, from https://github.com/neurobin/shc, is using
> > > > > GPL-3+.
> > > > >
> > > > > So once again, This is the way I'm expressing it:
> > > > >
> > > > > Files: *
> > > > > Copyright:
> > > > >  Francisco Rosales <[hidden email]>, Copyright 1994-2015
> > > > > License: GPL-2.0+
> > > > > Files: *
> > > > > Copyright:
> > > > >  Md Jahidul Hamid <[hidden email]>, Copyright 2015-2019
> > > > > License: GPL-3+
> > > > >
> > > > > However, I've got a warning:
> > > > >
> > > > > shc source: global-files-wildcard-not-first-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright
> > > > > (paragraph at line 10)
> > > > >
> > > > > Would that be OK, or there IS a proper way to express it?
> > > >
> > > > Ah, I now remember, there is a way to suppress lintian warnings.
> > > > IMHO, it is the best way so far...
> > > >
> > > > Thx
> > >
> > > ping
> > >
> > > Pong. Has my past feedback been fully used? Are my past e-mails still somewhere
> > > in your mailbox?
> > >
> Sorry, please remind me how did you suggest me to do with this?
>
> shc source: global-files-wildcard-not-first-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright
> (paragraph at line 10)

Hi Bart,

I don't know how to properly express within the debian/copyright
file that the original author, Francisco, was using GPL-2+ license,
while new version, from https://github.com/neurobin/shc, is using
GPL-3+.

And I need your kind help to do it properly.

As for the most of the time in the message trail above and in the
history, I've guessed wrong about what you meant from your short
message. If you can give detailed help, that'd be most appreciated,

Thanks

tong

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#928099: publishing private e-mail

Bart Martens-3
In reply to this post by Tong Sun-4
Hello Tong Sun,

I hereby inform you that I unfortunately lack the time and interest to further
review the shc package. I suggest finding someone else on the mentors mailing
list or via other channels. In case there is no volunteer available in short
time, then there is also paid support, see this link:
https://www.debian.org/support

Cheers,

Bart


On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 07:55:04AM -0400, Tong Sun wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 7:50 AM Tong Sun
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > To me, your message, bearing a @debian.org address, should represent
> > that of debian.org, both privately or publicly, and never says thing
> that you will regret later, or say it publicly. Especially we are
> discussing public matters, that affects the public and all authors.
>
> Such decision should not be conducted behind close doors.
>
> > On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 7:45 AM Bart Martens <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Tong Sun,
> > >
> > > Please never publish my e-mails without my permission.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Bart
> > >

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#928099: publishing private e-mail

Mo Zhou
Hi Tong Sun,

Please be respectful to the others. Whatever the mail address prefix
the others use, the others have the right to make private discussion
and free speech because these are fundamental rights. I don't know
what happend but your comments are really not friendly.

If you really received problematic messages from a Debian developer,
please consider reaching out the Anti-harrasment team or DPL for help,
privately.

> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 07:55:04AM -0400, Tong Sun wrote:
>> >
>> > To me, your message, bearing a @debian.org address, should represent
>> > that of debian.org, both privately or publicly, and never says thing
>> that you will regret later, or say it publicly. Especially we are
>> discussing public matters, that affects the public and all authors.
>>
>> Such decision should not be conducted behind close doors.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Bug#928099: publishing private e-mail

Tong Sun-2
Hi All, 

I'm sorry if my message come out wrong, and being perceived as unfriendly. That was not my intention, and I'm sorry that people feel that way. 

Again, I was trying to say that, we were discussing the public matters that affects the package authors, thus affects the public, and I should have included [hidden email] at the very beginning. 

And I'm sorry for not having done that sooner, which might have changed everything, or might be not. But I'll start doing it now. 




On Sun, Jun 16, 2019 at 10:39 AM Mo Zhou - [hidden email] <pkgoyq.xpt.05ee5440cd.lumin#[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Tong Sun,

Please be respectful to the others. Whatever the mail address prefix
the others use, the others have the right to make private discussion
and free speech because these are fundamental rights. I don't know
what happend but your comments are really not friendly.

If you really received problematic messages from a Debian developer,
please consider reaching out the Anti-harrasment team or DPL for help,
privately.

> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 07:55:04AM -0400, Tong Sun wrote:
>> >
>> > To me, your message, bearing a @debian.org address, should represent
>> > that of debian.org, both privately or publicly, and never says thing
>> that you will regret later, or say it publicly. Especially we are
>> discussing public matters, that affects the public and all authors.
>>
>> Such decision should not be conducted behind close doors.