[ELPA] New package: rt-liberation

[ELPA] New package: rt-liberation

[Yoni Rabkin]

I've been asked to make rt-liberation available via GNU ELPA.

rt-liberation is an Emacs front-end to Best Practical's Request Tracker
(RT) system. rt-liberation allows writing and executing queries against
the RT REST interface in symbolic expression form, browsing RT queues
and tickets, and performing operations on tickets all from within Emacs.

It is a multi-file project with texinfo documentation.

rt-liberation is hosted on Savannah:
https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/rtliber/

Everyone who has significant code in the project has copyright
assignments for Emacs on file with the FSF.

One thing to mention is that RT is licensed under GPLv2. I contacted
Best Practical, explained how rt-liberation works, and asked them if
they are OK with me distributing rt-liberation under GPLv3. They
permitted me to license rt-liberation under GPLv3. This correspondence
with Best Practical is distributed as part of the project, in a file
named why-rt-liberation-is-under-gplv3.txt.

-- 
   "Cut your own wood and it will warm you twice"

Re: [ELPA] New package: rt-liberation

[Stefan Kangas]

Yoni Rabkin <yoni@rabkins.net> writes:

> One thing to mention is that RT is licensed under GPLv2. I contacted
> Best Practical, explained how rt-liberation works, and asked them if
> they are OK with me distributing rt-liberation under GPLv3. They
> permitted me to license rt-liberation under GPLv3. This correspondence
> with Best Practical is distributed as part of the project, in a file
> named why-rt-liberation-is-under-gplv3.txt.

Is this necessary for legal reasons or is it simply a courtesy?

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas

Re: [ELPA] New package: rt-liberation

[Yoni Rabkin]

Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> writes:

> Yoni Rabkin <yoni@rabkins.net> writes:
>
>> One thing to mention is that RT is licensed under GPLv2. I contacted
>> Best Practical, explained how rt-liberation works, and asked them if
>> they are OK with me distributing rt-liberation under GPLv3. They
>> permitted me to license rt-liberation under GPLv3. This correspondence
>> with Best Practical is distributed as part of the project, in a file
>> named why-rt-liberation-is-under-gplv3.txt.
>
> Is this necessary for legal reasons or is it simply a courtesy?

I view it as being fair to fellows in the free software community, while
ensuring that my own project has as solid a licensing stance as I can
provide.

-- 
   "Cut your own wood and it will warm you twice"