[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#649674: [copyright-format] Proofreading of the examples.

Le Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 08:58:30PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder a écrit :
> Unless the license itself has some relevant requirement on
> distribution of binaries, nothing mentioned above (except maybe the
> “verbatim”) requires the license headers from source files to be
> reproduced.  It is the copyright information and the (verbatim)
> license that actually matter.  Indeed, it is common practice to
> reformat the copyright information, for example by combining notices
> into a single list with one line per copyright holder.
>  - Policy could be clearer about “verbatim”.  Proposal: change
>    “verbatim copy of its copyright information and distribution
>    license” → “copyright information and a verbatim copy of its
>    distribution license”.  What do you think? :)  Worth a bug?


To my knowledge, for the reproduction of copyright notices, the latest
authoritative statement was made five years ago and was not relaxed.


  - Its not enough to have the following two-liner:
    | On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License
    | can be found in the `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL' file.
    There are license headers, like the one used for GPL in the example below, you
    should use those.

Integreations of the requirements of the above email in the Policy are
requested in ‘http://bugs.debian.org/462996’;.



Reply to: