On Fri, 09 May 2014 17:30:11 +0200 Joachim Breitner <nomeata@debian.org> wrote: > Thanks for asking. It is highly unusual to choose a different license > for the files in debian/ than for the package itself, and only makes > things unnecessarily complicated. > > What’s wrong with taking the copyright file from the template-debian/ > directory and just replacing the bits? I.e. replace "foo" by "hgettext", > past the license instead of "This is the text of the foo license." and > insert copyright years and names as reqiured. This is what I always do. I don't see any problem with just taking the template file. I thought, since other guides say so, I should make a machine parsable copyright file, but I will stick with the template. Should we maybe consider updating our template to a parsable format? > > (If you agree, please also change the copyright file in setlocale > accordingly.) Setlocale is public domain. So I guess we could distribute it under a BSD-3 license, but should we really do that?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature