Re: Bug#65577: PROPOSED] README.Debian should include notice if a package is not a part of Debian distribution

["C. Cooke" <ccooke@highwayone.net>]

On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, Brian Mays wrote:

<snip>

> > So I think to use README.Debian is appropriate.
> 
> I disagree.  Often README.Debian is used for more general things, such
> as explaining how a package is configured when built (compile-time
> options), how the Debian package differs from other versions of the
> same software available from other sources, general notes from the
> Debian developer about how a package should be used, etc.  Usually,
> the information in this file is not directly related to the Debian
> project at all.  The copyright file, IMHO, is used for Debian related
> information.  Consider what is already contained in this file:
> 
> (1) copyright and licensing information for the software (of course);
> 
> (2) the full name of the package;
> 
> (3) the location on the internet of the upstream sources;
> 
> (4) the name of the Debian maintainer, usually accompanied by a
>     history of the maintainers who have worked on the package; and
> 
> (5) a catalog of the changes made to the upstream sources in converting
>     them to a Debian package.

<snip>

So. What about, instead of using something in the README.Debian, create a
standard README.non-free, and include it in non-free packages. This makes
more sense, and can include a standard "why non-free is generally
bad" plus specific reasons.

-- 
Charles Cooke, Network Engineer
HighwayOne Corporation Ltd.