Open Stack

Hi,

Seems debian/copyright isn't correct and needs some refinement.

I don't think that openwrt-x86-ext2.image and openwrt-x86-vmlinuz should
be in the original sources at all. These are sourceless files, and
cannot fit Debian at all.

Thomas

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Bug#633600: nova: inadequate copyright file
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 23:54:02 +0000
Resent-From: Mike O'Connor <stew at vireo.org>
Resent-To: debian-bugs-dist at lists.debian.org
Resent-CC: Thomas Goirand <zigo at debian.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 19:50:39 -0400
From: Mike O'Connor <stew at vireo.org>
Reply-To: Mike O'Connor <stew at vireo.org>, 633600 at bugs.debian.org
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit at bugs.debian.org>

Source: nova
Version: 2011.2-1
Severity: serious
Justification: Policy 12.5


In reviewing this source package, I find several problems with the copyright
file:

tools/ajaxterm/sarissa* are LGPL, but this is not mentioned in
debian/copyright.  The rest of ajaxterm is public domain

In the smoketests directory, i find: openwrt-x86-ext2.image
openwrt-x86-vmlinuz
one seems to be a kernel, the other an ext2 image with a kernel and
grub.  The
licenses for these are not mentioned in debian/copyright, and I do not find
source for these

The license and copyright notice from nova/virt/xenapi/fake.py does not
appear

contrib/boto_v6 is under a MIT like license that is not mentioned in
debian/copyright, nor are its copyright holders

bin/nova-manage carries a BSD license which is not mentioned in
debian/copyright, nor are its copyright holders

bye,
stew