Re: Bug#436105: suggestion to add GPL-1 as a common licence
Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
> I therefore propose adding GPL version 1 to the list of licenses said by
> Policy to be in common-licenses and asking Santiago to include a copy in
> base-files. I'm not including a diff since it would just create merge
> conflicts with the BSD diff proposed earlier today and because it's
> fairly obvious, although I can if people would prefer.
> Objections or seconds?
This has now been merged for the next Policy release. Santiago, when you
get a chance, could you release a new version of base-files that includes
the GPL version 1 in common-licenses? Thank you!
--- a/policy.sgml
+++ b/policy.sgml
@@ -9407,14 +9407,15 @@ END-INFO-DIR-ENTRY
<p>
Packages distributed under the Apache license (version 2.0), the
- Artistic license, the GNU GPL (version 2 or 3), the GNU LGPL
- (versions 2, 2.1, or 3), and the GNU FDL (versions 1.2 or 1.3)
- should refer to the corresponding files
+ Artistic license, the GNU GPL (versions 1, 2, or 3), the GNU
+ LGPL (versions 2, 2.1, or 3), and the GNU FDL (versions 1.2 or
+ 1.3) should refer to the corresponding files
under <file>/usr/share/common-licenses</file>,<footnote>
<p>
In particular,
<file>/usr/share/common-licenses/Apache-2.0</file>,
<file>/usr/share/common-licenses/Artistic</file>,
+ <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-1</file>,
<file>/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2</file>,
<file>/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-3</file>,
<file>/usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-2</file>,
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: