Re: New: "cme run paste-license script" (was: Re: pasting license text into debian/copyright)
On Sunday, 22 October 2017 12:10:29 CEST Andreas Tille wrote:
> > without the matching section in Licenses (the one you trying to add). cme
> > emits a warning when reading a copyright file with this error. This value
> > is ignored because of this error.
> Sorry, I do not understand. I the string CeCILL (with capital I) is in the
> main license section. Could you please be more verbose how d/copyright
> needs to look like to make cme add the license text?
Uh ? From a fresh git clone of beads, cat debian/copyright shows:
Upstream-Contact: Olivier Langella <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Copyright: 2008-2010 Michel Zivy <email@example.com>, Olivier Langella
Copyright: Andreas Tille <firstname.lastname@example.org>
There's no main CeCILL section.
And cme complains:
$ cme check dpkg-copyright
cme: using Dpkg::Copyright model
Configuration item 'Files:"*" License short_name' has a wrong value:
license 'CeCILL' is not declared in main License section. Expected
Admitedly, the error message is lackluster when main License section is empty.
This will be fixed.
> > > Warning: Files:"debian/*" License short_name skipping value CeCILL
> > > because
> > > of the following errors: license 'CeCILL' is not declared in main
> > > License
> > > section. Expected
> > Likewise.
> Likewise I fail to understand. ;-)
> Yes please. I'd be really happy if you could push a d/copyright that is
> correctly formed to let cme work.
I hope that won't be necessary. See below.
> I redirected simply for this mail here ...
> > err. it never occurred to me that someone could feed cme output to patch
> > ....
> Yes, I had this clue only since the first column '+' is a feature
> frequently used in patch. Just a wild guess of mine.
It's just that cme uses a diff to show the delta between old and new value.
It's not supposed to be used as a patch. May be I should just display a
"changed" message when summarising the changes applied to a text parameter.
> > cme should write debian/copyright provided no error is left.
> That's what I'd prefer.
So we have a common goal :)
> I admit I do not really like that GUI.
I'm open to idea on how to improve the GUI while keeping it generic for the
other models supported by cme (e.g ssh systemd itself ...)
> $ cme modify dpkg-copyright -force 'License:CeCILL text=.file(COPYING) !
> Files:"*" License short_name=CeCILL Files:"debian/*" License
> short_name=CeCILL' cme: using Dpkg::Copyright model
> Warning: Files:"*" License short_name skipping value CeCILL because of the
> following errors: license 'CeCILL' is not declared in main License section.
> Hmmm, sorry, no change to d/copyright.
Sorry, my bad. I dropped a '!' during cut'n'paste.
Here's the right command tested on beads repo:
$ cme modify dpkg-copyright -force 'License:CeCILL text=.file(COPYING) !
Files:"*" License short_name=CeCILL ! Files:"debian/*" License
[ snip ]
$ git diff --stat
debian/copyright | 508 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 507 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> No, sorry, I seem I totally fail to understand. Why exactly can't cme
> simply copy the text that is specified as CeCILL into my copyright?
It did so, but refused to write the output due to errors.
> Sorry for my probably very naive questions but obviously I do not
> understand the philosphy behind.
No problem. cme tries to address a very complicated problem and can be
confusing when dealing with corner cases.
Thanks for your patience and questions. This is invaluable to improve the
usability of cme. :-)
All the best
https://github.com/dod38fr/ -o- http://search.cpan.org/~ddumont/
http://ddumont.wordpress.com/ -o- irc: dod at irc.debian.org