Re: Non-free package documentation requirement

[Ian Jackson <ian@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Alex Yukhimets writes ("Re: Non-free package documentation requirement"):
...
> [Ian:]
> > A package which is non-free must contain a file
> > /usr/doc/<package>/README.non-free (or one of its dependencies must
> > contain a relevant such file).  This file must contain either:
> > 
> > 1. A copy of an electronic mail message received by the package
> > maintainer from the copyright holder(s) denying a request to make the
> > package DFSG-free. 
> 
> Insert here: or a short description of the ongoing discussion.

I disagree.  A package's placement in non-free should be a last
resort.  Making sorting out the copyright a requirement for inclusion
in non-free will encourage efforts to fix the problem.

> >  Package maintainers should usually use a standard
> > request for this, which is at [INSERT URL/FILENAME].  The request must
> > have stated that the response will be made public, and must also be
> 
> Upstream author may object to making his response public.
> In this case maintainer sould NOT include the response, but just make a
> note of that.

This is already covered by ...

> > included in the file.
> > 
> >  or
> > 
> > 2. A description by the package maintainer of their unsuccessful
> > attempts to communicate with the original author to get a response to
> > the request above.  If the author's email address is believed to be
> > known this must include at least two emails sent at intervals of at
> > least one month.
> 
> Insert here: (One email is enough if package upload date is within one
> month from the date of the first email).

See my disagreement above.

Ian.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org