Bug#47438: Copyright Information (Debian Policy Manual)
- To: 47438@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Bug#47438: Copyright Information (Debian Policy Manual)
- From: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>
- Date: Sat, 04 Jul 2009 15:26:24 -0700
- Message-id: <[🔎] 87ocs0xey7.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
- Reply-to: Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>, 47438@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <87r5x2inb6.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> (Russ Allbery's message of "Mon\, 29 Jun 2009 17\:21\:17 -0700")
- References: <d1b732a70906291037y1d4f7b2ai706f225573f6b607@mail.gmail.com> <87d48noros.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu> <d1b732a70906291057t3afda3f1hd59d0dbdbdbe20f@mail.gmail.com> <20090629225317.GB2706@dario.dodds.net> <d1b732a70906291711q377a159fx218dfef10fe8aa65@mail.gmail.com> <87r5x2inb6.fsf@windlord.stanford.edu>
Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
> Well, from my perspective Debian rigorously tracks *licenses*.
> Copyright notices are, I think, a distraction. They're not required
> in any country that's a Berne signatory and they really have no
> practical effect.
>
> The GPL requires that we retain the copyright notice that was on the
> manual when we started, or I'd just remove it entirely to avoid the
> confusion.
>
> What would people think of a patch like this, to at least remove the
> confusion?
>
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -25,6 +25,13 @@
> and Christian Schwarz.
> </copyrightsummary>
> <p>
> + These are the copyright dates of the original Poilcy manual.
> + Since then, this manual has been updated by many others. No
> + comprehensive collection of copyright notices for subsequent
> + work exists.
> + </p>
> +
> + <p>
I've applied this patch (with the obvious typo fix for "Poilcy") for the
next release.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: