Re: Bug#677013: RFS: time
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 10:46:09PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Bart Martens <bartm@debian.org> writes:
>
> > The previous package maintainers are also copyright holders of debian/*
> > so debian/copyright needs an update for that.
>
> While a package sponsor can of course ask for whatever they'd like before
> being willing to sponsor a package,
Hey Russ, I didn't "ask for whatever" I "like".
> I do think it's worth noting that the
> majority of packages in Debian do not record the copyright statements for
> all contributors to the debian/* packaging, nor is this something that
> we're enforcing on an archive-wide basis. It's a nice thing to do, but
> I'm not sure how important it really is given that all those contributions
> are already documented in debian/changelog.
A "must" in debian-policy is not just "a nice thing to do".
>
> > The file debian/copyright "should name the original authors", and David
> > Keppel is such an author.
>
> For the purposes of satisfying this portion of Policy, I think that
> treating "authors" as meaning the same thing as "copyright holders" is
> quite reasonable.
We know that "authors" are not the same as "copyright holders". Debian-policy
uses "should" for the "authors" and "must" for the "copyright information".
>
> I think asking people to document more authorship than upstream provides
> in upstream's copyright statements is asking for quite a lot,
Debian-policy "is asking for quite a lot".
> and also is
> a standard that we are not following in most of the rest of the archive.
> I certainly don't bother to do that with my packages; documenting
> upstream's copyright notices seems sufficient to me. If upstream doesn't
> consider it important enough to record, I don't consider it a mandatory
> part of being a Debian package maintainer to go do that historical
> research myself, assuming that there are no legal issues raised by the
> omission.
In this case the "original author" was simply mentioned in the upstream
software.
>
> If upstream provides a separate CREDITS or THANKS file supplementing their
> legal notices, I generally install that as a documentation file like any
> other
That is, in my opinion, good practice, unless their contents are already copied
entirely into debian/copyright.
> (but don't bother to invent copyright notices for all the people
> listed there to add to debian/coypright).
Adding invented copyright notices to debian/copyright for authors that are not
copyright holders would be wrong.
To be honest, Russ, and no disrespect meant, I'm surprised to see that someone
from the Technical Committee and the Policy team goes so lightly over mixing
"authors" and "copyright holders" and over the importance of "must" and
"should" in debian-policy on debian-mentors. It is, in my opinion, better to
stick to current debian-policy on debian-mentors, and to debate possible
improvements of debian-policy elsewhere.
Regards,
Bart Martens
Reply to: