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

Bug#827060: [opensmtpd] Please see Salsa MR for fixed copyright



Control: reassign -1 opensmtpd
Control: submitter -1 !
Control: retitle -1 [opensmtpd] Please fix d/copyright [patch]
Control: severity -1 wishlist
Control: tag -1 + patch

Hi,

I believe the tags 'missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright' that
you reported as false positives are in fact correct due to a possible
misunderstanding of the DEP-5 specification. Please find a fixed
copyright in this merge request on Salsa:

     https://salsa.debian.org/debian/opensmtpd/merge_requests/1

In the MR, I also removed the unused Lintian overrides and adjusted a
spelling-related override.

The DEP-5 specifications [2] is not very clear, and Lintian is
occasionally accused of being too strict or too severe with related
tags. (#779676) Measured against the sheer number of copyright files
in the archive, however, we receive very few complaints.

I know little about DEP-5, but I do know what works with Lintian. In
your case, you referred to multiple and also different texts as
'permissive' or 'additional-restrictions', which is not allowed. You
also used the keyword 'and' informally without tying together two
separate, "stand-alone" license stanzas.

Either way, locally Lintian issued no more copyright tags after I
applied my merge request to your git repo. That's why I assigned the
bug to your package. Please feel free to reassign back to Lintian if
you think I was mistaken.

Kind regards,
Felix

[1] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/


Reply to: