Re: making debian/copyright machine-interpretable
* Sam Hocevar:
> Hello, I would like to gather comments about a proposal I have been
> thinking about during the GPLv2/v3 and GPLv2/CDDL discussions. I have
> finally written down what I have in mind here, and refined it with the
> help of many people on IRC:
It's probably better to use a separate file. If there's a syntax
error, you can't be sure if the file is in the old format, or if its a
Copyright statements with year numbers need to be updated once per
year, complicating merging from upstream. Is this really worth the
effort? Copyright holder information is probably not very valuable
without unique identifiers per copyright holder anyway.
In order to automatically detect licensing violations, the files in
the binary package would need annotations. Annotating the source
files is not sufficient.