Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.project > #9068
| From | Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.project |
| Subject | Re: Unaddressed use cases for machine-readable debian/copyright files |
| Date | 2017-03-25 16:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <toVND-2Fc-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <toBOW-5jj-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
Hi! On Fri, 2017-03-24 at 14:02:49 -0400, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > In returning my attention to current Debian packaging practices and > conventions I took my first serious look at good old DEP5, and brought > the debian/copyright file for my first-ever package, xtrs[1], into > conformance with the new[2] standard[3]. > > However, in doing so, I encountered some use cases that are not covered > by this standard. Happily, all of them triggered lintian warnings as > well, which gives me a framework within which to present my problems. > > The attached debian/copyright file may also illuminate these matters. I think all your concerns are already mostly covered by the spec, except notably for the license namespacing. Something that is also a common source of confusion, is that because it specifies a Files field, it seems it compels people to do very fine-grained splitting. Personally I have no issue with coalescing copyright notices, as long as they are all for the same license, etc. I even coalesce copyright years for the same owner. See for example the libbsd copyright file, being more fine-grained would be madness IMO. And it is my understanding that ftpmasters find this to be fine. So instead of going over all your fine points, I've taken the liberty instead to fix the copyright file in what I'd consider to be correctly formatted; in two ways, first following the original spirit, of very detailed listing, and then another condensed one which is what I'd have done. They are incremental patches over your original one. Thanks, Guillem
Back to linux.debian.project | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Unaddressed use cases for machine-readable debian/copyright files "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2017-03-24 19:10 +0100
Re: Unaddressed use cases for machine-readable debian/copyright files Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> - 2017-03-25 16:30 +0100
Re: Unaddressed use cases for machine-readable debian/copyright files Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> - 2017-03-25 19:40 +0100
Re: Unaddressed use cases for machine-readable debian/copyright files "G. Branden Robinson" <g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> - 2017-03-26 00:20 +0100
Re: Unaddressed use cases for machine-readable debian/copyright files Dominique Dumont <dod@debian.org> - 2017-04-07 14:40 +0200
csiph-web