mainSCADA plastic rolling machine - Support: sr #109551, Make sure this group meets...

 
 

sr #109551: Make sure this group meets Savannah hosting requirements

Submitter:  Ineiev <ineiev>
Submitted:  Tue 04 Sep 2018 12:52:17 PM UTC
   
 
Category:  None Priority:  5 - Normal
Severity:  3 - Normal Status:  None
Privacy:  Public Assigned to:  None
Open/Closed:  Closed Operating System:  None
* Mandatory Fields

Add a New Comment Rich Markup
   

Jump to the original submission

Thu 20 Jun 2019 11:02:51 AM UTC, comment #34: 

cool!

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Sun 16 Jun 2019 04:57:36 PM UTC, comment #33: 

Thank you, I think this group is now compliant.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Fri 14 Jun 2019 10:37:18 AM UTC, comment #32: 

Hi!

ok, done.

Also added license text from license.txt rather from web text, now it's better shown.

good example this task.

cheers

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Mon 10 Jun 2019 03:34:47 PM UTC, comment #31: 

CC-BY-3.0-COPYING and images/COPYING.

-email is unavailable- recommended adding a note on top of it, see task #15279.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Mon 10 Jun 2019 12:11:40 PM UTC, comment #30: 

Hi!

I've only found one file, it's the binary database users.DB

I've changed it to a sql script file for it's installation.

is there anymore? Which one?

thanks,
Joa

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Mon 10 Jun 2019 06:49:13 AM UTC, comment #29: 
Ineiev <ineiev>
Thu 25 Apr 2019 08:51:09 AM UTC, comment #28: 

Hi!

> Yes, I've even mentioned it in this sr, https://www.gnu.or /prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Notices.html


A README was already added in the images folder, with the legal text provided by Creative Commons in it also.

The license text was already added in the images folder as COPYING

> I'm sorry, I evidently wasn't clear. What was problematic isn't the kind of license itself, it's how the package declared these things. In particular, the license notice should be clear and unambiguous, including the version numbers of the licenses in question, and a copy of every relevant license should be present in the tarball.


The version was already shown, it sais clearly version 3.0

now also I've just added the license text in project root directory trying out if it was what is suppose to be wrong.

cheers!

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Thu 25 Apr 2019 08:16:28 AM UTC, comment #27: 

I'm afraid, no.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Tue 23 Apr 2019 11:17:20 AM UTC, comment #26: 

Hi!

It's done

is it ok now?

cheers

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Tue 23 Apr 2019 08:48:23 AM UTC, comment #25: 

No progress for many months. I'm going to remove these packages from Savannah.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Sat 08 Dec 2018 11:42:14 AM UTC, comment #24: 


>> The README file should be in the same directory with the files in question.
> Is there any docs supporting this?


Yes, I've even mentioned it in this sr, https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Notices.html

> I changed CC-BY-SA to CC-BY, I think it's now fully compatible with GPLv3+


I'm sorry, I evidently wasn't clear.  What was problematic isn't the kind of license itself, it's how the package declared these things.  In particular, the license notice should be clear and unambiguous, including the version numbers of the licenses in question, and a copy of every relevant license should be present in the tarball.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Thu 29 Nov 2018 11:25:58 AM UTC, comment #23: 


> Then something is clearly wrong about with your check procedures;


I think it's done.

> The README file should be in the same directory with the files in question.

 
Is there any docs supporting this?

For learning purposes I see other projects as Gimp, and it has image folders without README.

https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/tree/master/icons

Have they any good reason?

Also...

I changed CC-BY-SA to CC-BY, I think it's now fully compatible with GPLv3+

cheers

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Sun 18 Nov 2018 11:37:48 AM UTC, comment #22: 


> Could you point me which files lack copyright and license notice? I already double-checked them


Then something is clearly wrong about with your check procedures; there aren't very many files in your tarball, and the procedures miss some of them.

You can't comply with Savannah hosting policies in the long term unless you learn how to properly maintain the legal status of files in your package, can you?

> The images licenses are in the root readme file, as was pointed by one of your partners in the past. It's not enough?


The README file should be in the same directory with the files in question.

> could you give some link or documentation about CC recommendations, I've found nothing.


I think if you can't find out basic things about a license, you'd better avoid using it.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Sat 17 Nov 2018 07:56:18 PM UTC, comment #21: 

Hi!

Could you point me which files lack copyright and license notice? I already double-checked them

The images licenses are in the root readme file, as was pointed by one of your partners in the past. It's not enough?

could you give some link or documentation about CC recommendations, I've found nothing.

Joa

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Sat 17 Nov 2018 05:38:29 PM UTC, comment #20: 

Some files still completely lack copyright and license notices. images/ should have a README file with a list of files and their licensing terms; for the case of CC licenses, please check CC recommendations on how to use their licenses for your work.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Fri 21 Sep 2018 05:25:42 PM UTC, comment #19: 

I agree that providing documentation on how to write alarms.csv instead of the file itself is an option.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Thu 20 Sep 2018 07:38:23 AM UTC, comment #18: 

I forgot to push my commit.

It's done now, well the alarms CSV is totally optional, and configurable (for all this it's in a CSV not in source code)

I think it's enough with the instructions given in README, and the texted example provided. As README is already licensed.

In fact I think is better as I provide documentation about setting your own alarms and messages.

cheers

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Wed 19 Sep 2018 05:29:33 PM UTC, comment #17: 


> well I don't understand your proposal about preprocessing.


It means that you first automatically remove the comments, and then give it to the program.

> what I've done is capture it as a photo example in images, and talked about it in README. Finally I removed also the polemic file.


I can't see that change in your repository; anyway, I'm afraid, that won't do.

If you put a graphical file without its source (in that case, the original CSV file), you make your package unredistributable, because the GPL requires that the redistributors provide the full corresponding source code, and they would have no source for that file.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Tue 18 Sep 2018 07:38:27 AM UTC, comment #16: 

Hi!

well I don't understand your proposal about preprocessing.

what I've done is capture it as a photo example in images, and talked about it in README. Finally I removed also the polemic file.

is it ok?
cheers

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Mon 17 Sep 2018 11:10:43 AM UTC, comment #15: 

If that program can't handle comments, you can preprocess the file.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Sat 15 Sep 2018 06:43:30 PM UTC, comment #14: 

But I can't insert a license header in the CSV file, if I do that program fails to take the raw data in there. :-/


Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Sat 15 Sep 2018 05:38:56 PM UTC, comment #13: 

Yes, it's enough for those files; however, some files still lack notices, for example, alarm.csv. Please check them all and make sure that valid notices are present.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Thu 13 Sep 2018 08:19:26 AM UTC, comment #12: 

OK, I added the copyright notice to modbus_client.cpp, and copy whole license header in the QT .pro file of modbus_client.

is it enough?

thanks, and cheers
Joaquín

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Wed 12 Sep 2018 05:36:09 PM UTC, comment #11: 


> Ok, so I think I've finished


Thank you!

> I'm not too sure about the modbus_client folder, it's an external application but with custom configuration files.


It doesn't matter whether it is external application or a subroutine, it doesn't matter who wrote it; since you put these files in your tarball, you should make sure they all have valid copyright and license notices.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Tue 11 Sep 2018 09:00:19 AM UTC, comment #10: 

Ok, so I think I've finished

I'm not too sure about the modbus_client folder, it's an external application but with custom configuration files.

I added a readme there, I don't know if it's enough.

thanks for your time,
cheers,
Joaquín

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Tue 11 Sep 2018 06:50:38 AM UTC, comment #9: 

Yes, these two files are fine.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Mon 10 Sep 2018 06:02:45 AM UTC, comment #8: 

Hi,

I'm really sorry about the late response.

Ok, So I've set only the main copyright holder, is mask5.cpp fine now?

COPYING file fixed also, by the way.

thanks, and cheers
Joaquín

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Fri 07 Sep 2018 01:27:12 PM UTC, comment #7: 

It's desirable to have copyright and license info embedded in files, because it's easy for developers of other packages to copy source files and forget about the rest; in such cases if the notices are written somewhere else, they'll be lost.

If there are multiple copyright holders, you should provide a copyright notice for the main copyright holder and (optionally) copyright notices for other people who have contributed large amounts.

Please check GNU documentation on copyright notices, it explains the matter much better than I can.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Fri 07 Sep 2018 11:19:28 AM UTC, comment #6: 

I guessed that.

but what Can I do if there are several copyright holders?

I thought there was some kind of mechanism of "by the authors, see file authors"

isn't it?

cheers,
Joaquín

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Wed 05 Sep 2018 01:52:50 PM UTC, comment #5: 

The license notice is fine (I'd just recommend rewrapping the long line), but the copyright line isn't: it says "copyright by its authors" which is almost a tautology. It should be more specific.

Ineiev <ineiev>
Wed 05 Sep 2018 10:35:32 AM UTC, comment #4: 

Hi,

I've modified mask5.cpp with the license and copyright header I think is correct.

Please could you confirm it's ok, or give some hints if it's already wrong?

Once finished I'll insert the same in other source files.

cheers,
Joaquín

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Tue 04 Sep 2018 07:11:47 PM UTC, comment #3: 

same as in [sr #109552], I'll do the faster I can.

I'll make the progress public in both tasks as I start finishing points.

cheers,
Joaquín

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Tue 04 Sep 2018 01:45:23 PM UTC, comment #2: 


> The only point I not agree is about qt4, if I'm not mistake, it's also licensed under LGPLv2.1 and LGPLV3


I think you are right.

When are you planning to fix the rest?

Ineiev <ineiev>
Tue 04 Sep 2018 01:16:23 PM UTC, comment #1: 

Hi!

Of course!
work in progress.

The only point I not agree is about qt4, if I'm not mistake, it's also licensed under LGPLv2.1 and LGPLV3, so I think there is no problem linking it in a GPLV3+ application. (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#AllCompatibility)

Is it ok?

cheers
Joa

Joaquín Cuéllar <gentooza>
Group administrator
Tue 04 Sep 2018 12:52:17 PM UTC, original submission:  

This package doesn't comply with some Savannah policies:

  • Some files like README and mask7.cpp lack copyright and license notices.
  • Copyright notices in files like mask5.cpp aren't really valid, and license notices say it's GPLv3-only. Savannah policies require that software must be GPLv3+-compliant.
  • The package depends on Qt4, it's GPLv3-only; in order to make the package effectively GPLv3+, dependencies like that should be eliminated.
  • The COPYING file is a modified version of the canonical GPLv3 text; developers should use https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.txt.


Could you please fix that?

Ineiev <ineiev>

 

(Note: upload size limit is set to 16384 kB, after insertion of the required escape characters.)

Attach Files:
   
   
Comment:
   

No files currently attached

 

Depends on the following items: None found

Items that depend on this one: None found

 

Carbon-Copy List
  • -email is unavailable- added by gentooza (Posted a comment)
  • -email is unavailable- added by ineiev (Submitted the item)
  •  

    There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.

    Only logged-in users can vote.

     

    Follows 1 latest change.

    Date Changed by Updated Field Previous Value => Replaced by
    2019-12-23 ineiev Open/ClosedOpen Closed

    Back to the top

    Powered by Savane 3.13-f8d8.
    Corresponding source code