On 04:17 Mon 08 Jun , Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 12:51:39PM +0200, Xavier Oswald wrote: > > So I see no needs in having the debian maintainer(s) name who were involved in > > the creation in debian/copyright too. It's an information duplication. > > The one reason to include this information in debian/copyright is that the > packagers may be copyright holders for contents under Debian. However, this > a) is not limited to the original packagers, b) may not be true in many > cases today, where the debian/ directory for many packages is trivial > boilerplate. Im not speaking about debian copyright holder in debian/changelog. We sure need to keep copyright holder of debian modifications. I was thinking about this: "This package was debianized by ... <...@...> on $Date$." Since the name of the of the original packagers is listed too as described in the new format specification [1]. It's only a proposal but I think it has been well studied and is now applicable. We know the original packager and date by watching in the debian/changelog first entry. [1] http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat?action=recall&rev=196 Greetings, -- ,''`. Xavier Oswald <xoswald@debian.org> : :' : GNU/LINUX Debian Developer `. `' GnuPG Key ID 0x88BBB51E `- 938D D715 6915 8860 9679 4A0C A430 C6AA 88BB B51E
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature