[maemo-developers] Extras QA checklist
From: Jeremiah Foster jeremiah at jeremiahfoster.comDate: Wed Oct 28 21:00:49 EET 2009
- Previous message: Extras QA checklist
- Next message: Extras QA checklist
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Oct 28, 2009, at 16:45, Attila Csipa wrote: > On Wednesday 28 October 2009 15:23:14 Jeremiah Foster wrote: >> Actually, this is not that hard. The license information has to be in >> the debian/copyright file. If the package comes from debian, you can >> be pretty sure that the license (i.e. the copyright file) is correct. > > I was mostly referring to packages that are not straight Debian > ports but > rather 'native' (or significantly altered) Maemo applications. But > we do not > need to go that far. No - I think you are right, packages that are not straight ports need to be scrutinized. :) > Often even really basic building blocks lack proper > license/attribution information (for example Qt itself has no > debian/copyright or license files included. Probably not commercial > edition, > but is it GPL or LGPL ? Maybe both ?). > > Anyway, I'm among the first ones to check for licensing info, and > the current > approach (leaving it out from the binary packages because of space > considerations and not displaying it anywhere on the maemo.org web > interface) > does not make it any easier. Surely burling through the debian dir > of source > packages is not the best/easiest long-term way of doing this, > especially if > it's something *QA testers* are supposed to do ? Yeah, this is kind of detailed work and hard to automate, but I think we ought to try and do some type of automated check and raise a flag if we see copyright issues. Jeremiah
- Previous message: Extras QA checklist
- Next message: Extras QA checklist
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]