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

Re: Why do we list individual copyright holders?



 ❦ 22 décembre 2017 19:58 -0800, Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> :

>> IANAL, but it seems pretty clear to me that this is not the case, at
>> least for source packages (see 4.c), for binary packages we also have to
>> distribute any associated NOTICE files (see 4.d, but I guess we violate
>> this rule quite a lot), which I would guess usually contain copyright
>> information.
>
>> https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>
> I just found a few packages under Apache 2.0 that didn't distribute the
> NOTICE file.  It turned out that the same information was in
> debian/copyright, but that may not be the case in the future.
>
> I'll file a wishlist bug against Lintian to check for a NOTICE file in
> packages that say they're under Apache 2.0 and warn if it's not included
> in the binary package.

4.d also says NOTICE can be distributed in the source form when it is
distributed along the derivative work (which is our case).

Unrelated, but I am developing some kind of "lintian fatigue". People
may find helpful to let Lintian warn about every little thing. Each time
I have to update a package, I have new lintian notices and/or
warnings. Sometimes Lintian is right, sometimes it's not. Most of the
time, this is quite pointless for me.

Related, this d/copyright stuff is also pointless to me (for the same
reasons pointed by zigo).
-- 
The naked truth of it is, I have no shirt.
		-- William Shakespeare, "Love's Labour's Lost"

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: