On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 10:40:33AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > On 10572 March 1977, Kevin Mark wrote: > > > You mean they check ever single time $RANDOM_PACKAGE enter NEW and don't > > assume its correct until someone raises an objections? > > Yes. And the big number of rejects due to incorrect debian/copyright > files (more than for technical reasons) shows that it is neccessary. > > If we wouldnt check the packages we would have stuff in debian that > contains statements like "YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO GIVE THAT CODE TO > ANYONE", has license incompatibilities, talks about legal actions > against you if you modify code, etc. pp. Hi Joerg, I understand the general idea of a DFSG-free license but, for example, if Clint uploads yet another zsh package bugfix, I'm not expecting him to have it under a different license then the last 99 uploads. And if there was a license change, you could detect it by checking the current package license 'tag' against some 'oldtag' stored by some random method. This assumes that the developer classified it correctly in the initial setup, and then this was verified by the ftpmasters and the developer doesnt have some malicious intent to not notify ftpmaster of a new license change via these said 'tag's. Cheers, Kev -- | .''`. == Debian GNU/Linux == | my web site: | | : :' : The Universal | debian.home.pipeline.com | | `. `' Operating System | go to counter.li.org and | | `- http://www.debian.org/ | be counted! #238656 | | my keysever: pgp.mit.edu | my NPO: cfsg.org |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature