Bug#566220: What criteria does ftpmaster use for the ‘copyright’ file of a package?
Charles Plessy <plessy@debian.org> writes:
> Le Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 02:48:39PM +1100, Ben Finney a écrit :
>> Especially in combination with your later points (that the copyright
>> notices can't be “corrected”, which I take to imply that aggregation
>> and re-phrasing of the notices is also verboten), there seems to be
>> little point reproducing the verbatim copyright *notices*, especially
>> since they're all in the source regardless.
> Dear all,
> Given that the patch that is being rushed in the Policy (#566220) does not
> clarify what is meant by “verbatim”,
That's because there isn't a precise definition in existing practice, and
the purpose of that change is to document existing practice unless and
until we reach some consensus for changing it. Not to set some new
standard other than what we've historically followed. The current
practice is that verbatim is not a clearly defined term and people are
using a common-sense, and imprecise, definition.
Incidentally, don't you think it's a little inaccurate and melodramatic to
describe as "rushed" something that hasn't even been committed to a Git
repository yet, let alone put into any sort of release, and whose only
action so far has been some discussion and three seconds?
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: