[Pkg-cli-apps-commits] [SCM] openbve branch, master, updated. debian/1.4.0.0-1-12-gda4f423
Paul Sladen
debian at paul.sladen.org
Tue Jan 17 20:15:51 UTC 2012
The following commit has been merged in the master branch:
commit da4f423ca722547ed2d1f5eff71d0eba342c2732
Author: Paul Sladen <debian at paul.sladen.org>
Date: Tue Jan 17 21:13:47 2012 +0100
debian/copyright: Use Format: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/
Tweak Copyright: fields based on credits.html and note
Space paragraph-breaks with leading full-stops
diff --git a/debian/copyright b/debian/copyright
index 25b1684..28c5f48 100644
--- a/debian/copyright
+++ b/debian/copyright
@@ -1,223 +1,214 @@
-Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
-Upstream-Name: Openbve
+Format: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/
+Upstream-Name: Openbve Stable source
Upstream-Contact: Michelle Boucquemont <reschanger at gmail.com>
-Source: http://trainsimframework.org/downloads.html
-Comment:
- This package was Debianised by Paul Sladen <ubuntu at paul.sladen.org>
- on 2009-02-16 00:12 +0200
-
- It was downloaded from:
- http://trainsimframework.org/downloads.html
-
- Upstream authors:
- Michelle Boucquemont <reschanger at gmail.com>
- Jens Rügenhagen
- Anthony Bowden <anthony-b at railsimroutes.net>
+Source: http://trainsimframework.org/downloads.html (openbve_stable_source.zip)
+Comment: From http://trainsimframework.org/credits.html
Files: *
Copyright: 2008-2012 Michelle Boucquemont
-License:
- From 'http://trainsimframework.org/index.html', current:
-
- openBVE is a cross-platform, free-as-in-freedom train simulator
- placed in the public domain. This means that you can make any
- modifications to it you like and share your modifications with
- others.
-
- From 'Readme.txt', current:
-
- This program is placed in the public domain. This means that you
- can make any modifications to it you like and share your
- modifications with others.
-
- From 'http://trainsimframework.org/index.html', earlier versions:
-
- Dedication to the public
-
- This program, along with all website content, is dedicated to the
- public. I do not pose any restrictions or requirements on how this
- material can be used, and explicitly encourage redistribution and
- modification for any purpose.
-
- From 'Readme.txt', earlier versions:
-
- Dedication to the public
-
- This program is dedicated to the public. I do not pose any
- restrictions or requirements on how this material can be used, and
- explicitly encourage redistribution and modification for any
- purpose.
-
+ Anthony Bowden
+ Jens Rügenhagen
+License: permissive
+ From 'http://trainsimframework.org/index.html', current:
+ .
+ openBVE is a cross-platform, free-as-in-freedom train simulator
+ placed in the public domain. This means that you can make any
+ modifications to it you like and share your modifications with
+ others.
+ .
+ From 'Readme.txt', current:
+ .
+ This program is placed in the public domain. This means that you
+ can make any modifications to it you like and share your
+ modifications with others.
+ .
+ From 'http://trainsimframework.org/index.html', earlier versions:
+ .
+ Dedication to the public
+ .
+ This program, along with all website content, is dedicated to the
+ public. I do not pose any restrictions or requirements on how this
+ material can be used, and explicitly encourage redistribution and
+ modification for any purpose.
+ .
+ From 'Readme.txt', earlier versions:
+ .
+ Dedication to the public
+ .
+ This program is dedicated to the public. I do not pose any
+ restrictions or requirements on how this material can be used, and
+ explicitly encourage redistribution and modification for any
+ purpose.
Comment:
- Below are some of the accompany statements that Openbve and the
- upstream developers have made regarding how the work can be used,
- this provider great insight and context into the wishes of upstream
- beyond the simple and permissive "public domain" wording.
-
- It's notable that the intent and appreciation for sharing and
- openness has always present with upstream, as can be seen from the
- name "Open...". Openbve was itself a reaction to "freeware", but
- non-distributable (and non-fixable) version of "BVE Train Simulator".
-
- Although the intent has been constant, the PD wording has evolved,
- attempting to remain short. Upstream have welcomed input where it
- as been offered on the licence-terminology; as can be seen in the
- discussion and the preference would be for copyright law to not
- exist (international treaties dictate otherwise for the moment).
-
- History
-
- In 2008, in preparation for Debian packaging, discussion was started
- with upstream for the upstream bugtracker/forum and is copied below
- for context. (It was at the time the closest introduction to the
- licence and intent behind the Openbve project).
-
- More information on the thinking behind the "license free" intend has been
- saved in this 'debian/copyright' file, the essence of which is:
-
- Post by michelle on Sat, 14th Feb 2009, 18:00, UTC
-
- I have been approached by some individuals over the time, including
- from the GNU project and the Ubuntu Foundation (as it appears at
- least), and was told that they lack a means of "legal security" for
- reuse without an explicit license. You can read my above post on
- details about my attitude regarding this matter, but as a start, I
- have decided to put the following line on the homepage and will also
- include it in any later release:
-
- " This program, along with all documentation provided, is dedicated
- to the public. I do not pose any restrictions on how this material
- can be used, and explicitly encourage redistribution and
- modification for any purpose. "
-
- Full thread from which the above is taken:
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
- http://openbve.freeforums.org/licence-t39.html
- == Licence ==
-
- Post by Sacro on Sat, 26th Apr 2008, 16:39, UTC
-
- Just out of curiosity, what licence applies to OpenBVE? It'd be nice
- to know if it's GPL or BSD or whatever as I'm quite interested in
- helping out.
-
- Sacro
-
- == Re: Licence ==
-
- Post by michelle on Sun, 27th Apr 2008, 07:43, UTC
-
- My attitude differs from so called "free software" licenses. I try to
- explain:
-
- With proprietary software, the developers usually try to restrict what
- you are allowed to do with the software to the uttermost extreme that
- is legally possible. This falls under the category of copyright.
-
- Then there is something that is sometimes called green copyright. So
- called free software falls in this category. As with proprietary
- software, a license is used to tell users what they are allowed to do
- and what not. The difference to proprietary software is that so called
- free software licenses are usually much more permissive, yet the
- author decides what you are allowed to do and what not. So called free
- software is usually attributed to derive from "freedom" instead of
- "free of charge". Still, if the author employs a license telling other
- people what they can or cannot do, this inherently cannot have
- anything to do with freedom.
-
- Then there is something called public domain, which I consider to be
- an inherently good thing as everyone has eventually the same rights as
- the author. However, releasing a work into the public domain is not
- legally meaningful in many countries. Also, releasing a work into the
- public domain (if possible) depends on the generosity of the author,
- and this decision is made by the author.
-
- My attitude is even one step further: I am opposed to copyright, thus
- I marked the game with the legally not meaningful phrase of
- "anti-copyright". It is legally meaningless, because in every country
- that has some form of copyright, it would require these laws to be
- abandoned. Still, why do I have this attitude?
-
- With a license, I would be telling other people what they can or
- cannot do. I am not such a person. I will not make any silly
- restrictions on how you can use this program, I will not tell you to
- put my name on any derived work, I will never ever give "permission"
- for you modify or redistribute the software, because I don't think
- that it is up to me telling you what you can or can't do. You should
- make this decision for yourself.
-
- I hope this briefly explained the situation.
-
- User avatar
- michelle
-
- == Re: Licence ==
-
- Post by michelle on Sat, 14th Feb 2009, 18:00, UTC
-
- I have been approached by some individuals over the time, including
- from the GNU project and the Ubuntu Foundation (as it appears at
- least), and was told that they lack a means of "legal security" for
- reuse without an explicit license. You can read my above post on
- details about my attitude regarding this matter, but as a start, I
- have decided to put the following line on the homepage and will also
- include it in any later release:
-
- " This program, along with all documentation provided, is dedicated
- to the public. I do not pose any restrictions on how this material
- can be used, and explicitly encourage redistribution and
- modification for any purpose. "
-
- michelle
-
- == Re: Licence ==
-
- Way to go Michelle!
-
- Good to hear from another lonely soul out there who gets the true
- meaning of freedom.
-
- BVEColorado
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Managed content
-
- In Openbve=1.4.0.0 in-program managed content was introduced, Openbve
- has gone out of their way to ensure that anything to be included in
- the managed content repositary is explicitly distributable. Although
- this does affect Debian/Ubuntu directly, is shows an understanding
- of the problems that can be present without having explicit statements:
-
- http://trainsimframework.org/develop/managed/licenses.html
- Managed add-ons - Accepted licenses
-
- All packages that you want to make available under managed content
- must contain a LICENSE file in the root directory of the
- package. The LICENSE file must contain either one of the following
- texts:
-
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
- This add-on is placed under the following license:
-
- YOU ARE ALLOWED TO MAKE VERBATIM COPIES OF THIS ADD-ON.
-
- There are no terms and no conditions. This applies worldwide and
- is unlimited in duration. If additional permissions are granted,
- they are covered in a separate license.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
-
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
- THIS ADD-ON IS PLACED IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.
-
- If this is not legally possible, you are given permission to
- use the add-on in any way you want (including redistribution
- and modification). There are no terms and no conditions.
- This applies worldwide and is unlimited in duration.
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
-
- This do not affect plugins packaged in Debian, but are what is
- necessary should a developer wish to make their content available
- from the new in-program managed content downloading system.
+ Below are some of the accompany statements that Openbve and the
+ upstream developers have made regarding how the work can be used,
+ this provider great insight and context into the wishes of upstream
+ beyond the simple and permissive "public domain" wording.
+ .
+ It's notable that the intent and appreciation for sharing and
+ openness has always present with upstream, as can be seen from the
+ name "Open...". Openbve was itself a reaction to "freeware", but
+ non-distributable (and non-fixable) version of "BVE Train Simulator".
+ .
+ Although the intent has been constant, the PD wording has evolved,
+ attempting to remain short. Upstream have welcomed input where it
+ as been offered on the licence-terminology; as can be seen in the
+ discussion and the preference would be for copyright law to not
+ exist (international treaties dictate otherwise for the moment).
+ .
+ History
+ .
+ In 2008, in preparation for Debian packaging, discussion was started
+ with upstream for the upstream bugtracker/forum and is copied below
+ for context. (It was at the time the closest introduction to the
+ licence and intent behind the Openbve project).
+ .
+ More information on the thinking behind the "license free" intend has been
+ saved in this 'debian/copyright' file, the essence of which is:
+ .
+ Post by michelle on Sat, 14th Feb 2009, 18:00, UTC
+ .
+ I have been approached by some individuals over the time, including
+ from the GNU project and the Ubuntu Foundation (as it appears at
+ least), and was told that they lack a means of "legal security" for
+ reuse without an explicit license. You can read my above post on
+ details about my attitude regarding this matter, but as a start, I
+ have decided to put the following line on the homepage and will also
+ include it in any later release:
+ .
+ " This program, along with all documentation provided, is dedicated
+ to the public. I do not pose any restrictions on how this material
+ can be used, and explicitly encourage redistribution and
+ modification for any purpose. "
+ .
+ Full thread from which the above is taken:
+ ---------------------------------------------------------------------
+ http://openbve.freeforums.org/licence-t39.html
+ == Licence ==
+ .
+ Post by Sacro on Sat, 26th Apr 2008, 16:39, UTC
+ .
+ Just out of curiosity, what licence applies to OpenBVE? It'd be nice
+ to know if it's GPL or BSD or whatever as I'm quite interested in
+ helping out.
+ .
+ Sacro
+ .
+ == Re: Licence ==
+ .
+ Post by michelle on Sun, 27th Apr 2008, 07:43, UTC
+ .
+ My attitude differs from so called "free software" licenses. I try to
+ explain:
+ .
+ With proprietary software, the developers usually try to restrict what
+ you are allowed to do with the software to the uttermost extreme that
+ is legally possible. This falls under the category of copyright.
+ .
+ Then there is something that is sometimes called green copyright. So
+ called free software falls in this category. As with proprietary
+ software, a license is used to tell users what they are allowed to do
+ and what not. The difference to proprietary software is that so called
+ free software licenses are usually much more permissive, yet the
+ author decides what you are allowed to do and what not. So called free
+ software is usually attributed to derive from "freedom" instead of
+ "free of charge". Still, if the author employs a license telling other
+ people what they can or cannot do, this inherently cannot have
+ anything to do with freedom.
+ .
+ Then there is something called public domain, which I consider to be
+ an inherently good thing as everyone has eventually the same rights as
+ the author. However, releasing a work into the public domain is not
+ legally meaningful in many countries. Also, releasing a work into the
+ public domain (if possible) depends on the generosity of the author,
+ and this decision is made by the author.
+ .
+ My attitude is even one step further: I am opposed to copyright, thus
+ I marked the game with the legally not meaningful phrase of
+ "anti-copyright". It is legally meaningless, because in every country
+ that has some form of copyright, it would require these laws to be
+ abandoned. Still, why do I have this attitude?
+ .
+ With a license, I would be telling other people what they can or
+ cannot do. I am not such a person. I will not make any silly
+ restrictions on how you can use this program, I will not tell you to
+ put my name on any derived work, I will never ever give "permission"
+ for you modify or redistribute the software, because I don't think
+ that it is up to me telling you what you can or can't do. You should
+ make this decision for yourself.
+ .
+ I hope this briefly explained the situation.
+ .
+ User avatar
+ michelle
+ .
+ == Re: Licence ==
+ .
+ Post by michelle on Sat, 14th Feb 2009, 18:00, UTC
+ .
+ I have been approached by some individuals over the time, including
+ from the GNU project and the Ubuntu Foundation (as it appears at
+ least), and was told that they lack a means of "legal security" for
+ reuse without an explicit license. You can read my above post on
+ details about my attitude regarding this matter, but as a start, I
+ have decided to put the following line on the homepage and will also
+ include it in any later release:
+ .
+ " This program, along with all documentation provided, is dedicated
+ to the public. I do not pose any restrictions on how this material
+ can be used, and explicitly encourage redistribution and
+ modification for any purpose. "
+ .
+ michelle
+ .
+ == Re: Licence ==
+ .
+ Way to go Michelle!
+ .
+ Good to hear from another lonely soul out there who gets the true
+ meaning of freedom.
+ .
+ BVEColorado
+ ---------------------------------------------------------------------
+ .
+ Managed content
+ .
+ In Openbve=1.4.0.0 in-program managed content was introduced, Openbve
+ has gone out of their way to ensure that anything to be included in
+ the managed content repositary is explicitly distributable. Although
+ this does affect Debian/Ubuntu directly, is shows an understanding
+ of the problems that can be present without having explicit statements:
+ .
+ http://trainsimframework.org/develop/managed/licenses.html
+ Managed add-ons - Accepted licenses
+ .
+ All packages that you want to make available under managed content
+ must contain a LICENSE file in the root directory of the
+ package. The LICENSE file must contain either one of the following
+ texts:
+ .
+ -----------------------------------------------------------------
+ This add-on is placed under the following license:
+ .
+ YOU ARE ALLOWED TO MAKE VERBATIM COPIES OF THIS ADD-ON.
+ .
+ There are no terms and no conditions. This applies worldwide and
+ is unlimited in duration. If additional permissions are granted,
+ they are covered in a separate license.
+ -----------------------------------------------------------------
+ .
+ -----------------------------------------------------------------
+ THIS ADD-ON IS PLACED IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.
+ .
+ If this is not legally possible, you are given permission to
+ use the add-on in any way you want (including redistribution
+ and modification). There are no terms and no conditions.
+ This applies worldwide and is unlimited in duration.
+ -----------------------------------------------------------------
+ .
+ This do not affect plugins packaged in Debian, but are what is
+ necessary should a developer wish to make their content available
+ from the new in-program managed content downloading system.
Files: debian/*
Copyright: 2009-2012 Paul Sladen
--
openbve
More information about the Pkg-cli-apps-commits
mailing list