On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 05:53:30PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > Steve Langasek <steve.langasek@canonical.com> writes: > > Clarify what is meant by "verbatim copy of its copyright and > > distribution license" to be explicit about what Debian has always > > required for this file, to put to rest the silly arguments that this > > should be parsed as "(copyright and distribution) license". > I'm discussing it on debian-devel precisely because I want to know > *which* interpretation is the project's understanding. I don't think a > fiat “clarification” to Policy is justified without that. You continue to insist on having a discussion about what Policy *means*. I've told you repeatedly what it means. This answer is authoritative not because I have some authority personally, but because this is the meaning that has *been consistently applied for the past decade*. Since you aren't willing to accept that this is the case, and therefore persist in an interpretation of Policy that is *wrong* with respect to the intent of the authors and the project, I have proposed to fix the language to eliminate the ambiguity. This is why the bug is tagged as 'informative'. If any DDs disagree that this is what Policy says, they are welcome to object. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature