[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Sponsorship requirements and copyright files

Le jeudi 19 mars 2009 à 23:42 +0000, Sune Vuorela a écrit :
> I think when uploading kde4.2 to unstable, at least 60 developer hours
> was put into working on the copyright files, even with loads of help
> from various scripts. 

The real problem here is that FTP masters require the list of copyright
holders to be up-to-date each time the package goes through NEW.

Whatever justification exists for this requirement, I’m starting to find
it unacceptable. If a package has to go through NEW, it takes about
twice as much time to update this list than to do the actual packaging

Why is this list needed? No other distribution is doing it, it’s useless
for users and it’s a giant waste of developer time. If the only purpose
is to follow American law, well thank you, but I’m not bound by other
laws than those of EU and France, and that makes already many.

I don’t think I’m going to spend any more minute to update this crap.
The next time I see a package REJECTed because of this frivolous reason,
you’ll have to find another mug to do this useless work.

Note: I’m not contesting the need for the license check. This one is
useful, and strictly checking the accuracy of licenses in
debian/copyright is clearly needed. But I don’t think there’s any use
having an up-to-date list of copyright holders in there.

 .''`.      Debian 5.0 "Lenny" has been released!
: :' :
`. `'   Last night, Darth Vader came down from planet Vulcan and told
  `-    me that if you don't install Lenny, he'd melt your brain.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: