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

Bug#677013: RFS: time

Bart Martens wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Bart Martens wrote:
> > > The file debian/copyright "should name the original authors", and
> > > David Keppel is such an author.

I have looked through many copyright files and do not see one that
does this.  See for example this one along with many others:


Of course that doesn't mean there aren't others that do.  I would
welcome an example to follow.  I just haven't found any.  Nor does it
mean that it isn't the right thing to do.  Although philosophically I
am not sure of the need for it since anyone looking for authors would
look in the AUTHORS file which is the canonical location for that
information, at least for GNU programs.

> > Thank you for taking the time to look at the copyright file in detail.
> > I admit the new DEP5 format confuses me.
> Me too.


> > Where would I find such a statement in the documentation?

To answer my own question it is stated here:


  In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources
  (if any) were obtained, and should name the original authors.

So definitely stated by Policy the original authors must be named.

> > How would this be defined in the file?  How would we comply with
> > that statement within the restrictions of the above documentation?
> No idea.

After doing more research and without any other input I think the only
thing that makes sense is to include the information in the free-form
Comment: block.  I don't find any other packages doing this (would
welcome an example) but it would definitely seem to be required by the
spirit of Policy 12.5 and there doesn't seem to be any other place to
put it in the DEP5 format.

> > The copyright holder is of course the FSF.  That is the copyright
> > statement listed in each of the files.
> > 
> > Should I list the original authors in a Comment: field?  I see no
> > other way.  Help!
> No idea.

I think putting this in a Comment: field about the only acceptable
solution that I can see that meets all of the (conflicting)

> Note that DEP5 is not mandatory.  Plain text is OK for policy.  What motivated
> you to switch to DEP5 ?

There are several facets.  First is that since the package needs to be
sponsored it means that every sponsor will have their own pet peeves
and requests.  Generally this means that everything must be of the
newest features.  You never know what a sponsor will ask for.  (Or
sometimes it must be of an older feature!)  DEP5 is one of Debian's
new features and therefore to get a package through sponsorship it
pretty much needs to have it.  See for example the request to move to
quilt instead of using the previous diff.gz format.  Also the request
to use the newest compat level which arrived during the updating of
this package.  Before Sandro offerred to help I had started
conversations with two other DDs for this package.  Since I am
completely at the mercy of a sponsor when they say jump I can only ask
how high and try my best to comply.  Although there was no specific
request for DEP5 there were requests to update the copyright file.

And secondly in the maintainers guide it specifically calls out DEP5

  4.2. copyright
  This file contains information about the copyright and license of the
  upstream sources.  Debian Policy Manual, 12.5 "Copyright information"
  dictates its content and DEP-5: Machine-parseable debian/copyright
  provides guidelines for its format.

I didn't read "Policy 12.5.1 Machine-readable copyright information"
which states that the format is optional until just now.  I didn't
realize it was optional.  And therefore I was and have been giving it
my best shot.

Note that the previous copyright file did not address the issues that
have been raised about the updated version of the file.  The new file
corrects some mistakes there.  Such as the previous attribution that
the program was written by David MacKenzie when the AUTHORS file
specifies the original author as David Keppel.  The new version is
definitely an improvement.

> I presume that the issue with the original authors is not yet solved in your
> package of "Jun 22 17:39".

I posted the file in the email between the "===>snip<===" lines to
make it easier to find.  The package didn't need to be pulled and
unpacked to see the file contents.  I posted it in the email for easy
reference.  (At least I was trying to make it easy.  :-)

And here is the latest candidate copyright file between "snip" lines
again.  I am rebuilding with the copyright file shown here.  I updated
and corrected the comments from the previous copyright file and
removed obsolete parts from it.

Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Upstream-Name: time
Upstream-Contact: bug-gnu-utils@gnu.org
Source: http://ftp.gnu.org/pub/gnu/time/time-1.7.tar.gz
 This is Debian GNU/Linux's prepackaged version of the FSF's GNU time utility.
 `time' is a program that measures many of the CPU resources, such as time and
 memory, that other programs use.  It was written by David Keppel.  It
 was subsequently maintained and improved by David MacKenzie with help
 from Arne Henrik Juul, and Francois Pinard.
 This package was put together by Dirk Eddelbuettel from the previous
 Debian package time-1.6-2 (from ftp.debian.org) and the GNU sources
 for time-1.6.  The package was subsequently maintained and updated by
 Tollef Fog Heen, Salvatore Bonaccorso, and Bob Proulx.

Files: *
Copyright: Copyright 1987-1996 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
License: GPL-2+

Files: debian/*
Copyright: Copyright 1995 Peter Tobias <tobias@et-inf.fho-emden.de>
           Copyright 1995-2004 Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@qed.econ.queensu.ca>
           Copyright 2005, 2008 Tollef Fog Heen <tfheen@debian.org>
           Copyright 2010 Salvatore Bonaccorso <salvatore.bonaccorso@gmail.com>
           Copyright 2012 Bob Proulx <bob@proulx.com>
License: GPL-2+

Files: debian/time.1
Copyright: Copyright 1996 Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd@miles.econ.queensu.ca>
License: freely redistributable
 Copyright Dirk Eddelbuettel but freely redistributable

License: GPL-2+
 This program is free software; you can redistribute it
 and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public
 License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
 version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later
 This program is distributed in the hope that it will be
 useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied
 PURPOSE.  See the GNU General Public License for more
 You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public
 License along with this package; if not, write to the Free
 Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor,
 Boston, MA  02110-1301 USA
 On Debian systems, the full text of the GNU General Public
 License version 2 can be found in the file

Thanks for all of your help!


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: