copyright stanzas [was Re: Sys::SigAction]

[Damyan Ivanov <dmn@debian.org>]

-=| gregor herrmann, Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 04:01:03PM +0100 |=-
> Hm, I actually prefer the "stand-alone" licenses at the end because
> they avoid duplication of the license boilerplate (for packages with
> several Files: stanzas that all have the same license but different
> copyright holders) and make reading of the Files: paragraphs easier.

Right. Avoiding bloat is good.

Files: *
Copyright: upstream
License-Alias: Perl
...
License: Perl
 Foo-Bar is distributed by the same terms as Perl.
 .
 Perl is distributed under ... (details)
 .
 On Debian ... (pointers to full texts)

Does that seem OK?

My problem with it is that the 'Foo-Bar' name would apply to all 
stanzas and some of them may not be 'Foo-Bar'.

Of course, that point is not holding if there's only one upstream 
copyright holder.


> Disclaimer: I have not followed the development of the proposed new
> format closely.

I checked it briefly today and it seems its authors wait for Lenny to 
be set free before initiating a DEP. IOW, the proposal won't settle 
soon.


-- 
dam            JabberID: dam@jabber.minus273.org