Re: Let’s turn DEP5 into something useful
Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> writes:
> What you probably complain about is this:
>
> Your debian/copyright file must contain the following information:
>
> - The author(s) name
> - The year(s) of the copyright
> - The used license(s)
> - The URL to the upstream source
>
> In many packages there is more than one author, more than one
> copyright-holder and more than one license. Do not miss to list them
> all, even if that other license is just for one file. Yes, any
> single file is important.
>
> This very strict rule was re-confirmed a few hours ago by one of the
> Project's archive administrators.
Thank you. Can we please have a public, canonical reference to this?
> This is not in the DEP, and I dislike it as much as you and others.
Right. I don't know where the idea came from that DEP 5 creates this
requirement, but I'm glad to see corroboration that it didn't originate
in DEP 5.
Maybe now this discussion about existing requirements for *content* can
be properly separated from discussion about a proposed file *format*.
--
\ “I have an answering machine in my car. It says, ‘I'm home now. |
`\ But leave a message and I'll call when I'm out.’” —Steven Wright |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Reply to: