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

Guidelines for writing d-l summaries (draft, still)

I'm going to continue to label this a draft, since this includes a
couple of new changes.  But I think everything here is fairly well

1) Draft summaries should clearly be marked.  After a suitable delay
   without serious objections, a version without the "DRAFT" marking can
   be posted incorporating any fixes.  If there are serious objections,
   discussion starts over and a new draft summary should be written.

2) The first sentence (which is a paragraph by itself) clearly states
   the conclusion, and includes the full name, including version number,
   of the license.

3) The reasons for the conclusion follow in list form.

4) Each reason should refer explicitly to the freedom that is
   restricted, and how it is restricted.  Where appropriate, include
   the DFSG section number.

5) An optional section titled "Suggestions" follows the list of reasons.
   It includes d-l's suggestions on how to resolve the problem(s).  If
   applicable, this should include any typographical, clarity, or other
   minor problems that debian-legal recommends fixing if a new version
   of the license is written.

6) A URL for the original license is included.

7) The full text of the license is included at the end.

Jeremy Hankins <nowan@nowan.org>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333  9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03

Reply to: