Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #14501

Re: bringing python-django-registration back into testing, dfsg issues

Path csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From Craig Small <csmall@debian.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.maint.python
Subject Re: bringing python-django-registration back into testing, dfsg issues
Date Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:30:01 +0200
Message-ID <Fa4LT-aixP-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <F9Srn-abgl-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Original-To "debian-python@lists.debian.org" <debian-python@lists.debian.org>
X-Mailbox-Line From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Mon Sep 26 22:26:19 2022
Old-Return-Path <csmall@debian.org>
X-Amavis-Spam-Status No, score=-105.192 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.082, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FOURLA=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, USER_IN_DKIM_WELCOMELIST=-0.01, USER_IN_DKIM_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
X-Policyd-Weight using cached result; rate: -3.5
X-Greylist delayed 457 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at bendel; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 22:25:59 UTC
X-Gm-Message-State ACrzQf0wE2yh3YuEY7aNOZnqP0+4RAh8pWoZLPXF+i4coVohU5DoEADW GWyJxrOETawz6u6sxubbfLCbRyv+9Vxq/j0iX27lKA==
X-Google-SMTP-Source AMsMyM7nkQfb+IYUhyKL0wrbizAiqArWOtLlekMmqP2ouzLugQNjH9EMeaDOPL9fgxpJqWYzhuY0ePKx0MT63FHjMGg=
X-Received by 2002:a17:907:c05:b0:73d:6e0a:8d22 with SMTP id ga5-20020a1709070c0500b0073d6e0a8d22mr20715749ejc.646.1664230670685; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:17:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version 1.0
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID <CALy8Cw5rv7RntVKWBMHnq2Fmz92qY=q+=9dc69LOeb8T8u0f-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000f3749405e99be5ed"
X-Mailing-List <debian-python@lists.debian.org> archive/latest/20346
List-ID <debian-python.lists.debian.org>
List-URL <https://lists.debian.org/debian-python/>
List-Archive https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/CALy8Cw5rv7RntVKWBMHnq2Fmz92qY=q+=9dc69LOeb8T8u0f-Q@mail.gmail.com
Approved robomod@news.nic.it
Lines 112
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway
Sender robomod@news.nic.it
X-Original-Date Tue, 27 Sep 2022 08:17:39 +1000
X-Original-Message-ID <CALy8Cw5rv7RntVKWBMHnq2Fmz92qY=q+=9dc69LOeb8T8u0f-Q@mail.gmail.com>
X-Original-References <YzFuPEy0miBrGJAI@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org>
Xref csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:14501

Show key headers only | View raw


[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Mon, 26 Sept 2022 at 19:18, Elena ``of Valhalla'' Grandi <
valhalla@debian.org> wrote:

> http://www.unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/Scripts.txt
> http://www.unicode.org/Public/security/latest/confusables.txt
> which, if my understanding of https://www.unicode.org/copyright.html is
> correct aren't DFSG, but could be redistributed.
>
Given they sit under Public aren't they DATA FILES and subject to
https://www.unicode.org/license.txt
That license seems very BSD 3-Clause-ish.

I suppose it comes down to what "Further specification" means. Does it mean
license.txt overrules copyright.html?

You could ask debian-legal for guidance.

Do you think it is ok to upload the package like this?
>
It's not ideal but if the result is you cannot use those confusables then
its the only way forward.


> 2) Even if the answer to 1 is yes, I can also try to package
> confusable_homoglyphs: upstream can download the files from the unicode
> consortium if they aren't available: do you think it's better to use
> that ability and package the file in contrib, or just put everything in
> non-free?
>
> Personally, the latter sounds quite easier, and I would be strongly
> tempted by it.
>
I have a similar problem with SNMP MIBs (thanks IETF). They're not even
redistributable so I have a contrib mibs-downloader package.
If the system can do it itself, that's ok but it needs to be something that
the user knows is happening. I have had issues with WordPress before where
it has links in some of the themes.

So in summary:
 * See if license.txt is the actual license and its DFSG free (I think it
could be)
* If not, I'd package the files in a separate archive

 - Craig

-- 
> Elena ``of Valhalla''
>
> 🧛
>

Back to linux.debian.maint.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

bringing python-django-registration back into testing, dfsg issues Elena ``of Valhalla'' Grandi <valhalla@debian.org> - 2022-09-26 11:20 +0200
  Re: bringing python-django-registration back into testing, dfsg issues Craig Small <csmall@debian.org> - 2022-09-27 00:30 +0200
    Re: bringing python-django-registration back into testing, dfsg  issues Elena ``of Valhalla'' Grandi <valhalla@debian.org> - 2022-09-30 10:50 +0200

csiph-web