Re: Wish: sources cited in /usr/doc documentation
On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 09, 1999 at 10:38:52PM +1100, Martin Mitchell wrote:
> > See section 6.5:
> >
> > Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its
> > copyright and distribution license in the file
> > /usr/doc/<package-name>/copyright. This file must
> > neither be compressed nor be a symbolic link.
> >
> > In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources
> > (if any) were obtained, and explain briefly what modifications were
> > made in the Debian version of the package compared to the upstream
> > one. It must name the original authors of the package and the
> > Debian maintainer(s) who were involved with its creation.
> >
> > You should report a bug against listar if it does not provide this
> > information.
>
> Does this belong in the copyright file? I think another file might be better.
>
> Actually, I don't think this should be a requirement at all, merely a
> suggestion. What if I obtain some really old software from someone else
> by email and can't find a URL for it? Also, right now I have no idea where
> the upstream authors for `guavac' are, so the upstream information for
> that package (which may not even be present, but I think it is) is incorrect.
> And I can't fix it.
I'm sure it would be quite acceptable to explain precisely that in the
copyright file..
Jules
/----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\
| Jelibean aka | jules@jellybean.co.uk | 6 Evelyn Rd |
| Jules aka | jules@debian.org | Richmond, Surrey |
| Julian Bean | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk | TW9 2TF *UK* |
+----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+
| War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. |
| When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. |
\----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Reply to: