[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: copyright precision

On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:30:34AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > > Not because we are legally bound to do so, but because we want to do our 
> > > job as distributors properly.  We appreciate good quality packaging!
> > It's at least worth a discussion whether nitpicking at d/copyright is
> > really helping the package quality at all, and if it's worth it.
> I would be interested in having numbers how frequently a d/copyright
> file is accessed by users (should be possible to do via popcon
> techniques).
I don't know use cases when an user would access it...

> A recent example (seqan2, currently in NEW) where I needed to review
> lots of copyright statements seems that even upstream is not caring a
> lot. 
Sure, most upstreams don't care about licenses, that's one of the reason
writing a d/copyright is harder than copying some clear list put together
by the upstream.

> In short: We have examples where a maintainer spents a lot of time into
> things that are matching our formal principles but do not match reality.
... which is not just about d/copyright.

> In other words: We are serving our princinples but not our users.  This
> is no vote to drop or relax our principles but sometimes some less
> strict handling might be helpful for all involved parties.
I'd happily vote to drop or relax some of our principles.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: