[Mldonkey-users] [patch #7646] Include .desktop file in source package

[spiralvoice]

URL:
  <http://savannah.nongnu.org/patch/?7646>

                 Summary: Include .desktop file in source package
                 Project: mldonkey, a multi-networks file-sharing client
            Submitted by: bugmenot
            Submitted on: Di 25 Okt 2011 20:41:24 CEST
                Category: None
                Priority: 5 - Normal
                  Status: None
             Assigned to: None
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any
         Should Start On: Mo 25 Jul 2011 02:00:00 CEST
   Should be Finished on: Mo 25 Jul 2011 02:00:00 CEST

    _______________________________________________________

Details:

Could a .desktop file (for Linux users) be included in the source package?
Heres the example file included in Arch Linux's mldonkey package:

[Desktop Entry]
Name=MLDonkey GUI
Comment=multi-protocol P2P program
Exec=mldonkey_gui
Icon=mldonkey
Terminal=false
Type=Application
Categories=Network;P2P;

    _______________________________________________________

Follow-up Comments:


-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mi 20 Feb 2008 21:31:41 CET   By: Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
"Can I add GNU MP as an optional dependency? (GNU MP is LGPL)
I think I can't add MIRACL as an optional dependency too because it uses a
non-free license, is it right?"

Yes, that's right.


-------------------------------------------------------
Date: So 17 Feb 2008 22:55:19 CET   By: Andrius da Costa Ribas <andrius>
Can I add GNU MP as an optional dependency? (GNU MP is LGPL)
I think I can't add MIRACL as an optional dependency too because it uses a
non-free license, is it right?

-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mo 21 Jan 2008 20:24:01 CET   By: Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
(I forgot to close the registration)

-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mo 14 Jan 2008 22:13:08 CET   By: Andrius da Costa Ribas <andrius>
thank you

-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mo 14 Jan 2008 19:39:14 CET   By: Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
Hi,

I approved your project.
You'll receive a confirmation mail shortly.


-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sa 12 Jan 2008 23:21:11 CET   By: Andrius da Costa Ribas <andrius>
hi,

README file was created, the note of dual-license was added in the html page

Cheers.

(file #14791)

-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sa 12 Jan 2008 18:43:15 CET   By: Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
"I don't know which licenses are suitable for licensing images ( I just found
Free Art license, but I don't know where to put the notice of the license for
the images and not even if it is a suitable or valid free license)"

The license can be put in a separate file, in the same directory (for example
README).

The Free Art license is a license we recommend for media files. Since the
images are meant to be included in the documentation, it would make sense to
also release them under the GFDL, to avoid any license incompatibility.


"the html page has in its beginning the notice of GNU FDL, before the part of
the pseudo-code there is the notice of GNU GPL, is it the right way to
dual-license the code?"

I think so. You could also explicitely state (for example, after the GFDL
license notice) that the bits of code present in the documentation are
dual-licensed. This way there is no ambiguity.


-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mi 09 Jan 2008 01:46:39 CET   By: Andrius da Costa Ribas <andrius>
I don't know which licenses are suitable for licensing images ( I just found
Free Art license, but I don't know where to put the notice of the license for
the images and not even if it is a suitable or valid free license)

the html page has in its beginning the notice of GNU FDL, before the part of
the pseudo-code there is the notice of GNU GPL, is it the right way to
dual-license the code?

-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Di 08 Jan 2008 19:45:31 CET   By: Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
Hi,

"Some images are just math phormulas generated by Open Office, I believe they
can't be licensed, other images are just math manual drafts scanned by me, I
think they don't need to be licensed, but if they need I will license them
too."

You own the copyright of the documents you generate with OpenOffice.org
(unless if you include content from 3rd-parties, such as clip-arts, in which
case that content's copyright also applies).

It is necessary indeed to explicitely state under which license you released
your media files.


"Since it is an algorithm I have doubts about wether licensing the pseudo-code
under GNU GPL or GNU FDL, if it can be licensed by both it is already ok.)"

Since you include the code in the documentation it is best to dual-license the
source code under the 2 licenses.


Please fix this and send us an updated tarball. We'll then review again the
project.

Cheers.






    _______________________________________________________

File Attachments:


-------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sa 12 Jan 2008 23:21:11 CET  Name: DSSORT.tar.gz  Size: 232kB   By:
andrius
I've corrected the license issues
<http://savannah.nongnu.org/task/download.php?file_id=14791>

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.nongnu.org/patch/?7646>

_______________________________________________
  Nachricht geschickt von/durch Savannah
  http://savannah.nongnu.org/