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

Incorrect missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright?



Hi folks!

I discovered that Linitan does not recognize license expressions in
stand-alone license paragraphs in a d/copyright file. They seem not to
be prohibited by DEP-5 as far as I can tell. Is it really so or do I
read the spec wrong?

https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep5/#stand-alone-license-paragraph

I found that recent Linitan emits the missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-
copyright tag for my package "rlottie" despite it contains a paragraph
with a compound header "License: MPL-1.1 or GPL-2.0 or LGPL-2.1". I
recall our linter was not triggering this tag earlier.

https://sources.debian.org/src/rlottie/0.1%2Bdfsg-2/debian/copyright/#L254

I would like to discuss this case before filing a bug report or adding
an override or changing the d/copyright file. Is this list an
appropriate place?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: