Overview
Loading...
Request History
mnhauke created request
I want to maintain fs-uae in Factory
factory-auto added opensuse-review-team as a reviewer
Please review sources
factory-auto added repo-checker as a reviewer
Please review build success
factory-auto accepted review
Check script succeeded
staging-bot added as a reviewer
Being evaluated by staging project "openSUSE:Factory:Staging:adi:42"
staging-bot accepted review
Picked openSUSE:Factory:Staging:adi:42
repo-checker accepted review
cycle and install check passed
mrdocs accepted review
OK, fair enough. Accepting.
licensedigger accepted review
ok
staging-bot accepted review
ready to accept
staging-bot approved review
ready to accept
dimstar_suse accepted request
Accept to openSUSE:Factory
fs-uae.x86_64: W: position-independent-executable-suggested /usr/bin/fs-uae fs-uae.x86_64: W: position-independent-executable-suggested /usr/bin/fs-uae-device-helper This executable should be position independent (all binaries should). Check that it is built with -fPIE/-fpie in compiler flags and -pie in linker flags.
Can you look at getting these fixed ? Otherwise, looks good to me. Thanks!
Position independed executables will break JIT suport in fs-uae. https://github.com/FrodeSolheim/fs-uae/issues/128
I don't think Frode Solheim himself ever gave you permission to assign his work's copyright to SUSE. Same for the other packages you want to submit.
All openSUSE Spec files are considered MIT licensed
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Specfile_guidelines#Specfile_Licensing
The MIT license requires that attributed copyrights are preserved
Frode's original work is unattributed https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file/home:FrodeSolheim:stable/fs-uae/fs-uae.spec?expand=1
Therefore this contributors efforts are correct, to include a header that is mandatory for all openSUSE Specfiles with a notional attribution of copyright to SUSE
There is nothing preventing Frode or anyone else contributing to the specfile and adding their attribution to the MIT license header at the top of the specfile
But just as it would be unethical and incorrect to reproduce such MIT licensed works without preserving attribution, it would be unethical and incorrect to attribute copyright works to an author whom chose not to attribute themselves
If Frode wishes to discuss this with the contributor directly, their email address is in the .changes - and I'd be happy to mediate any such discussion.
As a third party however, I think you have little say in the matter of Frode's copyright and it's attribution.
Wrong. They are considered "the same license as for the pristine package itself". Which is GPL for GPL applications.
Maybe read the page you linked to because "the same license as for the pristine package itself" is a direct quote from it.
The specfile was not written by SUSE. It was written by Frode Solheim. Misrepresenting that fact is actually a violation of copyright law.
Based on who's legal advice? This service is run by SUSE Linux GmbH and the lawyers hired by SUSE Linux GmbH informed the openSUSE distribution policy of considering all openSUSE Spec files as MIT licensed
Your self declaration to the contrary doesn't change the expectations of the operators of this service, nor the rules of the openSUSE Project, which this submission complied with.
Based on the text plainly written there!