[pkg-wpa-devel] Bug#718651: Built hostapd/wpasupplicant 2.1 (patch)

[Raphael Hertzog]

On Fri, 06 Jun 2014, Stefan Lippers-Hollmann wrote:
> The better question however would be, if a package like this would be 
> able to pass NEW[1] (as wpa had to for 1.0-1 - and it will have to pass
> through binary-NEW in the not too distant future again). While wpa

I believe so. Packages get rejected when their copyright file don't
mention all the licenses that are mentionned in the source code.

Missing attributions are certainly not a ground for reject. It might be
that some ftpmasters are more zealous than others, and in that case a
simple followup to the reject often helps to solve the problem.

There's also an open bug against debian-policy to clarify this IIRC.

Cheers,
-- 
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer

Discover the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/