Re: Bug#762228: RFS: ufoai-music review
On 2014-09-20 16:22, Markus Koschany wrote:
> On 20.09.2014 16:02, Tobias Frost wrote:
>> Addendum:
>>
>> On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 15:45 +0200, Tobias Frost wrote:
>>>> Absolutely agreed. But can you point me to examples where the short
>>>> reference to /usr/share/common-licenses was deemed not appropriate by
>>>> the FTP team?
>>
>>
>> From
>> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg00023.html
>> (the FTP master provides that link in their REJECT-FAQ,
>> https://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html, under "Copyright")
>> Its from 2006, but still valid)
>>
>>> - Its not enough to have the following two-liner:
>>> | On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License
>>> | can be found in the `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL' file.
>>>
>>> There are license headers, like the one used for GPL in the example below, you
>>> should use those.
>>
>
> I think that contradicts the information from Debian's Policy and the
> copyright format 1.0 manual and needs further clarification from the FTP
> team. There are many packages that use copyright format 1.0 and the same
> License paragraphs in the same way as I do and I am not aware that
> anybody rejected packages because of that.
Since you are referring to the MRCF 1.0, I think there is a
misunderstanding here. Look at the GPL examples at the bottom that
specification. All Tobias is asking you to do is to prefix your
two-liner with the standard 3-paragraph boilerplate, for a total of 4
paragraphs.
Reply to: