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

Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] fontforge_20160404~dfsg-1_i386.changes REJECTED

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 08:29:08PM +0530, Vasudev Kamath wrote:
> > Another (better, IMO) approach is to list the files in debian/copyright 
> > - i.e. add one or more sections covering group(s) of files without 
> > copyright and licensing, with comments on why it is deemed legally ok 
> > for us to distribute anyway.
> I think I will go with second approach and list down the files without
> copyright information. Regarding Licensing can't we assign collective
> license here?..

We can.  If there's only one or a few copyright holders, listing who owns
which file is feasible, but on a collaborative project with many authors,
doing so properly would be a monumental task, producing a massive unreadable
copyright file.  A big waste of time.  Saying just "Fontforge authors" is
enough -- what matters is 1. the license, 2. that in case of licensing
problems there's no easy way to contact all copyright holders.  Thus, other
than clearly marked subprojects with distinct authorship, a "Files: *"
stanza will do the bulk of the job.

An imaginary friend squared is a real enemy.

Reply to: