Re: copyright years in the copyright file
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: copyright years in the copyright file
- From: Osamu Aoki <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 00:10:24 +0900
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20140503151024.GA24050@goofy>
- In-reply-to: <email@example.com>
- References: <20140424235621.GA7571@xvii.vinc17.org> <20140425141629.GA9246@goofy> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <20140427152351.GC15890@goofy> <535D71A2.email@example.com> <20140430104659.GA5816@goofy> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 06:51:48AM +1000, Riley Baird wrote:
> > The upstream of the getmail writes this as his original code without
> > making copyright assignment to FSF. He is the licensor and not the
> > licensee. Thus, he is not bound by the quoted GPL2 license terms at
> > all.
> > This is exactly the reason why I as the licensee must not change the
> > upstream provided "copyright notice".
> Ah, okay. Could you at least change the debian copyright file? You're
> not changing the notice there; you're making a new one.
No. Please read the Debian Policy: 12.5 Copyright information
| Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its copyright
| information and distribution license in the file
If you make a *change*, then it is not a *verbatim* copy any more.
What I can make is to add a comment documenting the situation. This can
be requested as wishlist feature request bug. I do not see the value of
such action and I will mark such request as wontfix.
Please seriously think about the VALUE.