Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.project > #9068

Re: Unaddressed use cases for machine-readable debian/copyright files

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

Show all headers | View raw


[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 | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


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