Re: Proper notation for common licenses
On 22/09/14 18:48, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Markus Koschany (2014-09-22 19:25:20)
>> Version 1:
>>
>> License: GPL-2+
>> This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or [...]
>> This program is distributed in the hope that it will be [...]
>> You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License [...]
>> On Debian systems, [...]
>>
>> Version 2:
>>
>> License: GPL-2+
>> On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License
>> version 2 can be found in "/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2".
>
> Version 2 neither contains nor references "a verbatim copy of its
> copyright information" as required by Poicy - only its "distribution
> license" (which is only half of what Policy requires verbatim copy of).
I assume what Markus meant is that the full copyright file would have
one or more DEP-5 Files paragraphs with a one-line License, like
Files:
examples/*
Copyright:
© 2012 Mickey Mouse
© 2012-2014 Minnie Mouse
© 2014 Donald Duck
License: GPL-2+
in both cases, followed by either the "version 1" or "version 2" DEP-5
standalone license paragraph as above, with the choice between his
"version 1" or "version 2" being the intended outcome of this thread. Or
are you saying you consider the license grant quoted in "version 1" to
be part of the "copyright information" in Policy?
S
Reply to: