Re: Usage of DEP5
gregor herrmann <gregoa@debian.org> writes:
> On Fri, 08 Nov 2019 10:51:45 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
>> DEP-5 is the fastest way to write a d/copyright in some cases, but in
>> others it is not. Part of this is that DEP-5 somewhat encourages people
>> to include more detail than is needed.
>>
>> I think we should be optimising for reduced contributor time spent on
>> this task.
> That's a totally reasonable point of course.
> I'd like to add that d/copyright is not only written but also read,
> and that there are contributors who find Copyright-Format 1.0 easier
> to read.
Personally, I wrote a program to generate a Copyright-Format 1.0 file for
my packages, which makes it easier on all fronts than hand-maintaining the
file and is about as optimized for reduced contributor time as I can get.
(Every once in a while I have to tweak the script and curse the hacky way
that I wrote it.)
The script is an undocumented mess and only works with the specific
patterns of copyright and license notices that I've taught it, so everyone
else would be better off using licensecheck, but that's the same basic
idea.
Maybe one of these days I'll take a couple of days and turn it into
something vaguely maintainable and usable by someone else.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: