Quoting Dmitry Bogatov (2016-05-28 07:47:31) > > [add debian-devel back to cc] > >> Regarding _declaring_ appropriate DEP5 hints, with machine-readable >> DEP5 = copyright format you can declare a license in the _header_ >> section to = indicate the effective license caused by "infection" of >> indivifual parts = on the whole of the binary product. > > Almost sufficent, but not general enough. I don't follow, but instead of elaborating further here, see below... > Just an idea: new field in Package: stanza in d/control: > `Effective-License', which specify which terms you must comply with if > you use this library. In my case, I would leave debian/copyright > alone, and add `Effective-License: GPL-2+' to libghc-missingh-dev. > > And add rule, that Effective-License defaults to License in header, > which defaults to the most strict of licenses of individual files. > Add tool, that implement this rule. Hmm, it is complicated. > > Thoughts? > >> Also note that DEP5 format is only optional, so such automated = >> checks, even if/when existing, would not cover Debian as a whole. > > Is there no plans to push it into policy? I guess further progress to copyright format is driven by bugreports against debian-policy. Therefore I suggest you to file a bugreport if you feel there is substance for change. Since generally Policy reflects reality of Debian rather than steering changes to it, you might consider "backing" such bugreport by active use of your proposed new field: Copyright format explicitly permit the use of unofficial fields. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature