On Sun, 7 Jun 2015 17:30:02 -0500 "Steve M. Robbins" <steve@sumost.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 07:13:12AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
> > I think that the dep5-copyright-license-name-not-unique tag should either:
> >
> > - reduce its severity, as just an advice for readability, or
> > - only be issued when the same short name is used with a different description.
>
> Have to agree with Charles. I got the warning on the attached
> copyright file that uses the suggested "GPL-2+" twice and *with the
> same description*.
I fully agree. This check fails for the examples in [0] so it should
be removed or fixed. The offending code is in
checks/source-copyright.pm, lines 391-405:
for (@short_licenses) {
$short_licenses_seen{$_} = $i;
if (not defined($full_license)) {
$required_standalone_licenses{$_} = $i;
} else {
if(defined($full_licenses_seen{$_})
and $_ ne 'public-domain') {
tag 'dep5-copyright-license-name-not-unique',
"license: $_, (paragraph at line $current_line)";
} else {
$full_licenses_seen{$_} = $current_line;
print("license, seen = $_\n");
}
}
}
This adds the license to $full_licenses_seen when there is an entry
with a License: and then fails if there is another entry with the same
License. That's perfectly valid, as the examples show.
[0] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Cheers,
Javi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature