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