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

Re: Sponsorship requirements and copyright files

Noah Slater <nslater@tumbolia.org> writes:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 08:07:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:

>> NEW rejections are even stronger than an RC bug.  Apart from questions
>> of whether that's useful documentation for users, I have a hard time
>> seeing either of your reasons stated above as being RC-level bugs.

> You don't think that possible DFSG problems are RC bugs? :/

You gave two reasons:

 * [...] it serves as documentation that the package has been thoroughly
   checked for licensing issues.

 * It also provides a nice summary for our users.

Could you explain to me how the lack of those two things is a possible
DFSG problem?  I assume that this is based on the first, but that seems
like quite a stretch to me.  The same assurance, for what good there is in
it, could be drived from a statement in debian/copyright saying "I checked
every file in this package for DFSG licensing problems."

Also, no, I definitely do not think that a possible DFSG problem is an RC
bug.  I think that an *actual* DFSG problem is an RC bug.  A possible DFSG
problem is only a possible RC bug.  Surely this is obvious?

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: