[Bug 509158] Review Request: gnat-project-common – files shared by Ada libraries

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=509158





--- Comment #4 from Jochen Schmitt <jochen at herr-schmitt.de>  2009-07-02 13:19:18 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)

> Fixed (but it looks like I can't update the title of this review request).

You should be able to change the title of the bug by following the (edit) link
right on the title on top of this bug

> "Copyright only" is listed under Good Licenses at
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main. Please explain why you think it
> isn't valid.

Your right. 'Copyright only' sounds a little odd for a OSS license, but you
have right that this is it one.

> These files are so small that I don't care much about the license. I'd place
> them in the public domain, but as I understand it I can't do that under Swedish
> copyright law, so I figured I'd require copyright attribution only and
> otherwise let anyone do anything with them.

> > - Package contains not a verbatin copy of the license text
> 
> common.gpr contains the complete license text:
> -- Copyright 2009 B. Persson, Bjorn at Rombobeorn.se
> -- No restrictions are placed on this code.
> 

It's a good style to distribute the verbatin text of the license. Of corse this
may be a small file on your case, but in common it's a good idea, because the
user will get the version of the license text which was valid at the time of
publisching of your software. Additionally, It's not a blocker for approvement,
if a packaging is missing one.

> Yes, I am upstream and this is the first release, but I don't understand what's
> wrong with the version number. Version 1 means it's the first version, which is
> what it is. The package is too small to have major and minor version numbers,
> so if I need to change something I'll release version 2. What's the problem?

first, because it's your first release, I have to assume, that this package is
not widely tested and may contains bug. So it's a good idea to beginn the
versioning with a version nummer less the 1.0.

Second, If you have a major and a minor version number you can disting between
greater changes which may introduced new feature or have a API breakage and
minor changes which only fixed bugs.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.