Manphiz <manphiz@gmail.com> writes: > Nicholas D Steeves <sten@debian.org> writes: >> Manphiz <manphiz@gmail.com> writes: > >> Did you check if enable_pcre2_support.patch looks like it might have >> some new copyright statements that are not yet covered in >> debian/copyright? Please note that I didn't check, but your sponsor >> will expect that you have checked, and it would be best to check before >> filing an RFS >> > > This patch is merged from a patch set from a fork[1] of the upstream. > On the surface it doesn't look like it has a different copyright notice > so it should be of the same Apache 2.0 license. Still it may be better > for a license expert to take another look. > I understand ;) Yet you will probably need to use ripgrep or ack, or one of the many license check programs but whatever tool you use, it's a good habit to get into the following before proposing an upload: cd root-dir-of-repo ag copyright ag © ag '\(c\)' Most of the license check tools only require a single invocation, and you might prefer their output. debian/copyright isn't just about the logical license; we are also expected to reproduce upstream license grants. In other words: JOHN DOE worked on this, in this YEAR, and grants LICENSE, to GROUP-OF-PEOPLE, under these CONDITIONS. Sometimes "JOHN DOE" will be "TECH CORP", because the work was done on company time/premises. If I remember correctly, other distributions tend to only care about LICENSE, and don't care about JOHN DOE, nor as much about GROUP-OF-PEOPLE (ie: our DFSG no-descrimination policies). As for facts: It looks like the Debian maintainer of this package didn't document copyright and license for the m4 stuff (your sponsor might require this), and your patch is not work by Geoff Greer, so you'll probably need to add Greer to the copyright file. Best, Nicholas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature