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

Bug#885042: Check inclusion of Apache 2.0 NOTICE files



 ❦  2 janvier 2018 12:04 -0800, Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> :

>>> We currently allow distribution of a binary-package-only Debian image
>>> along with a written offer of source or, for non-commercial
>>> distribution, a simple pointer to the Debian source archives.  This
>>> complies with the GPL but wouldn't, at least by my reading, comply with
>>> the Apache 2.0 license unless we include the NOTICE files in binary
>>> packages.  (Which is fairly trivial to do -- in fact, I wonder if we
>>> should just solve this problem in debhelper and add NOTICE to the
>>> default debhelper dh_installdocs whitelist.)
>
>> Except for cases where the whole work is not under Apache license, only
>> part of it. In this case, the NOTICE file may not be at the
>> root. License also says documentation is fine, so debian/copyright could
>> be enough.
>
> debian/copyright would definitely be enough if people remembered to check
> NOTICE for each upstream release and copy its contents into
> debian/copyright, but I've forgotten to do this for packages in the past.
> Just installing the NOTICE files seems more foolproof to me, and involves
> less fiddly checklist stuff with each new upstream release.
>
> Good point about it possibly being hard for debhelper to find all the
> NOTICE files, though.

There is some irony on having a warning about license.txt that shouldn't
be in the binary copyright (because "all license information should be
collected in the debian/copyright file") but an error when we don't copy
the notice file.
-- 
Patch griefs with proverbs.
		-- William Shakespeare, "Much Ado About Nothing"

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: