On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 05:24:42PM +0100, Giovanni Mascellani wrote: > I'd like to convert my very little packages to the > machine-interpretable debian/copyright format described on the Wiki. Good idea. :-) > In my packages (but I think that this applies to many others) I have > some very little files, such as README or tiny documentations, which > don't include any specification of copyright holder or license terms, > and that are so little that it would be absurd to add them. Doesn't the combination have any either? If the combination is big enough to be copyrightable (and that's not big at all), then without such a statement Debian cannot distribute it. The statement doesn't have to be in every file (that's just recommended "to be sure", which I think is mostly about big files), but it has to be somewhere. > How should I cope with them? I couldn't find anything about this on the > Wiki page, maybe someone should add a few words on the question (I can > do it, once I get an answer!). I don't know what should be done with uncopyrightable pieces. However, they're so small, that you can just repeat them and say it's yours. ;-) Then again, in that case they're probably not worth packaging. Because a combination of several of those pieces is copyrightable, and needs a copyright statement and a license (from the person who combined them). Thanks, Bas -- I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org). If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader. Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word. Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either. For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature