Re: Revising Policy 12.5 (Copyright information)
On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 07:34:17PM +0100, Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > (For example, up until I
> > started experimenting with the new copyright file format, I never
> > documented the license or copyright information for any of the
> > Autotools-generated files, and I never heard a peep of concern about
> > that.)
> That's one of the grey corners. So far, my understanding is that they are not
> listed because they are only in the source tarball, and also autogenerated.
> The usual understanding seems that the licenses of these build scripts are
> documented in the corresponding auto* package and that should be sufficient.
However, the exception for works only in the source tarball is not applied
consistently, even when pointed out to the ftp team that a given license is
not applicable to the binary packages.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/