Rejecting drizzle source

[Clint Byrum]

Jamie, Monty, sorry for the slow response, on vacation until Sunday.
I'll take a look at both of these things on Monday. The license
patchwork is rather daunting, and I did do a bunch of *copyright*
assignment auditing and checking on the UNKNOWN licenses, but not much
known license auditing.

On Fri, 2010-11-12 at 12:33 -0800, Monty Taylor wrote:
> On 11/12/2010 12:03 PM, Jamie Strandboge wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I'm sorry to report that I am rejecting the drizzle 2010.10.03-1ubuntu1
> > source package because the debian/copyright file improperly lists the
> > following as GPL 2:
> > <snip>
> > It is possible that I missed some, so please use 'licensecheck -r' to
> > verify the copyright information on your own.
> 
> Thanks! Clint and I had gone through these before, but it's a big meaty
> mess, so thanks for finding those errors. Fixing right now.
> 
> (PS. Clint - we _really_ need to get that hudson license-checking job
> going. Sigh)
> 
> > Though I am not an upstart expert it seems the 'start' job may be more
> > specific than it needs to be. This is not a blocker and if it works in
> > testing, that is fine. I mention it only as a review point (I suggest
> > looking at other upstart jobs such as ssh).
> 
> Thanks -I'm definitely still learning upstart myself. I cargo-culted the
> start on stanza from the current MySQL package ... seemed like a good
> starting point. Clint - you're the new Upstart guy - thoughts?
> 
> It's working for me in local testing, so I think I'm going to leave it
> alone for now and see if I can get more specific feedback from Clint.
> 
> > While not strictly required, it is considered good form (and I would
> > highly encourage you) to use DEP-3 format for your patches in
> > debian/patches.
> 
> Done. Thanks.
> 
> > After fixing the above please feel free to reupload.
> 
> Re-uploaded ... thanks for the review/feedback!
> 
> Monty