Bug#250202: "debian/README.source" file for packages with non-trivial source
On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 05:21:05AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Frank Küster <frank@kuesterei.ch> writes:
> > Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> wrote:
>
> >> I believe the devref instructions are wrong. The proper location for
> >> this information is debian/copyright, which is already required to
> >> contain information about the provenance of the upstream source.
>
> I take this back -- devref has apparently already been changed. I should
> have checked first. devref now says:
>
> 1. must contain detailed information how the repackaged source was
> obtained, and how this can be reproduced in the debian/copyright. It
> is also a good idea to provide a get-orig-source target in your
> debian/rules file that repeats the process, as described in the
> Policy Manual, Main building script: debian/rules.
>
> and I don't see a reference to README.Debian-source.
>
> > I would argue that if the changes to the orig.tar.gz have been made for
> > other reasons than DFSG-freeness, debian/copyright is the wrong
> > place.
>
> Putting this information in debian/copyright is unrelated to DFSG-freeness
> or the license of the software. debian/copyright has several purposes
> specified in Policy, not just the license information, and one of them is
> to state the provenance of the source:
>
> In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources
> (if any) were obtained.
>
> Explaining where and how the .orig.tar.gz file was generated to me falls
> into the category of saying where the upstream source was obtained.
It does not. Let assume we removed some non-source files from the tarball
and repacked it. The upstream sources files were still obtained from
upstream website. The policy blurb does not say 'how the source
package were built' and I do not think this necessarily belong in
debian/copyright.
However if you build the tarball from two or more upstream source,
you have to mention that in the copyright file. If you change the
upstream source in a way that affect its licences status (e.g.
by removing non-free file) you have to document the discrepancy.
But I do not think the technical detail of the repacking belong there.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
Reply to: