On 14/02/2024 03:03, Loren M. Lang wrote:
The way you have written it right now means that src/resources/resource_storage.rs is only licensed under Apache-2.0 or MIT. If I understand correctly, the rest of the file is licensed under MPL-2.0. The correct license for the file is therefore: Apache-2.0 or MIT, and MPL-2.0. The comma is necessary to override the higher priority of `and'. This matches the example in section 7.2 of the Machine-readable debian/copyright file specification at https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/.I have a project where most files are under the original author copyright and license, but within one source file, there is a different copyright as it is copied from another source. The section of code in question is delineated with comments indicating the start and end. It is under a different copyright and license that the rest of the file or source tree, in general. How should I best indicate this in d/copyright? My current approach is to have a Files: * stanza which is the majority of the source tree and a separate Files: stanza pointing to this specific file with it's copyright and license. In the comments property, I'll indicate that this stanza only applies to a section of this file as delineated by comments and that the rest of the file should be in the default copyright and license listed above. Is this sufficient?
Here is the code in question: https://github.com/brave/adblock-rust/blob/dd970f26bc5877bef68f9e29d26db19c2f65b34b/src/resources/resource_storage.rs#L23 And here is my current example: https://salsa.debian.org/penguin359/debcargo-conf/-/blob/e8d22158840e1e40385e7f01dceaa0074b4d37e4/src/adblock/debian/copyright#L32 Thanks,
-- Vriendelijke groet, Kind regards, Victor Westerhuis