Re: Licenses not in /usr/share/common-licenses
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:25 PM, Russ Allbery:
>> So, I think [0] is the most astute message in that thread.
>
>> [0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2000/11/msg00251.html
>
> I thought that too when I first read it, but later in the thread are very
> cogent arguments for why it's wrong and providing a complete copy of the
> GPL with binaries is required.
Hmmm, I really meant that I found point 1 to be quite astute. I
agree, the conclusion is quite off. The copyright file is very
important in binary packages, and should have full-text licenses.
The important aspect of point 1 is the conclusion that at least with
the GPL you can distribute any source release as is; meaning that our
additional work on the full-text copyright file in the source package
is unnecessary.
I think this distinction between the needs of the source package
copyright file and binary package copyright file is very useful, and
can help steer towards a much simplified source copyright file, and
yet still satisfy the requirement for full-text binary copyright
files.
Best wishes,
Mike
Reply to: