Re: do I need to mention tiny change in copyright file

[Joël Krähemann <jkraehemann@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I am upstream of this package. The patch was submitted to upstream.
Upstream mentioned the submitter in the source packages ChangeLog.

So no need for DEP3.

Best regards,
Joël

On Fri, Mar 1, 2019 at 11:42 PM Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Joël,
>
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2019 at 01:38:56PM +0100, Joël Krähemann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Do I need to mention the person submitted 3 patches in
> > debian/copyright file, containing a total of 5 lines changed in my
> > package?
> >
> > I have attached the patches. Upstream did a notice in ChangeLog and
> > AUTHORS as tiny change, as recommended by:
> >
> > https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Legally-Significant
> >
> > bests,
> > Joël
>
> There seems to be a convention to credit the patch submitter in
> d/changelog with "thanks to Name Family_Name" when the patch is not
> legally significant.  When a patch is legally significant it must be
> documented in d/copyright.
>
> Of course if the patch submitter also submitted a changelog entry, or
> if the patch imports in such a way that it generates one crediting the
> author, I'll retain that.
>
> Oh, and this is in addition to proper DEP-3 headers where the
> submitter is credited and the source is provided.  When a patch is
> cherry picked from upstream, it falls under upstream's copyright, and
> I tend to believe that a DEP-3 header demonstrating upstream is the
> origin is sufficient, and that upstream's "Files: *" stanza doensn't
> needed to be extended to say "Files: *
> debian/patches/cherry-picked-commit.patch".  Once again, if it's not
> legally significant it shouldn't be added to d/copyright, but DEP-3
> headers should still be used.
>
>
> I'm sure more experienced members of this list can add something to
> the intersection of best practises and potential mountain of paperwork
> ;-)
>
> Cheers,
> Nicholas