On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 03:26:47PM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2023 at 01:55:02PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > Quoting Peter Pentchev (2023-02-22 10:49:30) > > > So I've seen this idea floating around in the past couple of years > > > (and in some places even earlier), but I started doing it for > > > the couple of pieces of software that I am upstream for after reading > > > Daniel Stenberg's blog entry: > > > https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2023/01/08/copyright-without-years/ [snip my original message] > [snip useful information] > > As a redistributor I find it a good practice to include most possible > > copyright and licensing information provided by upstream authors, > > exactly because we are doing a service for our users, and it is a slight > > disservice to omit information that upstream put effort into tracking > > and publishing. > > Wait, I may have been unclear. I did not mean that I want to omit > the upstream copyright years *when they are there*. And, of course, > if upstream does not specify any copyright years, we cannot invent > any out of thin air. So I guess my question was mainly what people > think about dropping the years in the debian/* copyright notice > (packaging files, patches, etc). OK, so it seems I did it again: I sent out my original message before really knowing myself what exactly the questions are that I mean to ask :) So now that I have thought about it a little, here they are: 1. Does the Debian Project consider it okay for an upstream package to include one or more (or all) files with clear license grants (either included or referred to in the files), and with clear copyright notices (again, either in the files or in a central file) that contain the authors' names, but no years? Does such a package comply with the DFSG? I believe the answer ought to be "yes", but I thought it wouldn't hurt to ask. 2. If an upstream project does that, the debian/copyright file should reflect that and have a `Files: *` (or whatever pattern) notice that has a copyright notice without any years... right? And if an upstream project does that between releases, the debian/copyright file should change (drop the years) in the next "new upstream release" upload... right? 3. Now, what about the `Files: debian/*` section of the debian/copyright file? The common wisdom seems to be that, if only to make it easier to submit patches to the upstream project, the debian/* files ought to be licensed under the same terms as the upstream source. Now I know that licensing and copyright are different things :) So would the Debian Project consider it okay for a Debian package to have a `Files: debian/*` section in its copyright file that does not mention any years? This question is both from a DFSG point of view and from a "what would be best for our users" one. And does the answer depend on whether the upstream project's copyright notices include years or not? (as in, should we follow upstream's lead in that, too) Note that none of that comes from any "it's so difficult" positions; I am actually one of the people who would include file-by-file stanzas in the debian/copyright files for upstream files with different copyright years :) G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev roam@ringlet.net roam@debian.org pp@storpool.com PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature