Bug#737559: copyright-format: author != copyright, add an author field?
On 03/02/14 20:17, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> severity 737559 wishlist
> user debian-policy@packages.debian.org
> usertags 737559 = normative issue
> quit
>
> Hi Daniel,
>
> Daniel Pocock wrote:
>
>> Author and copyright holder are not always the same person/entity.
> [...]
>> License: GPL2
>> Copyright: 2014, Acme, Inc http://acme.example.org
>> Author: Bob, http://example.org/bob
>
> Sure. A few thoughts:
>
> - I don't think debian/copyright needs to list everyone who
> contributed to the code --- to me, the copyright holders and some
> contact information for upstream seem more important, and the
> detailed authorship information can go elsewhere (e.g., a README or
> THANKS file, or the changelog). But policy's more ambiguous about
> that. See http://bugs.debian.org/678607.
>
> - The above is already valid syntax, since custom fields can be added
> to any paragraph. Feel free to try it and let us know how it goes.
> (copyright-format sayeth:
>
> No prefixing is necessary or desired, but please avoid names
> similar to standard ones so that mistakes are easier to catch.
> Future versions of the debian/copyright specification will
> attempt to avoid conflicting specifications for widely used
> extra fields.
>
> )
>
> - Response when this last came up[1]:
>
> This is nice in spirit, but I would personnally not feel like
> maintaining a contributor list, because there is mostly only
> blame to get in case it is inaccurate, so I would only use the
> field to point at a contributors file.
>
Just to clarify, I do not believe that maintaining this field should be
obligatory
It should be an optional field
Defining it formally in the standard and having some examples will help
emphasize the difference between what people should put in the Copyright
field and what should not be there.
If a maintainer feels that some author is particularly noteworthy or
deserving, then they can put that author's name in the field even if the
author has no entitlement to appear in the copyright field.
> This is the kind of field that I would prefer to see tested in
> real life before being standardised in DEP-5.
>
> So, I think this is a reasonable idea, and if more than two or so
> packages start using the field then it's probably worth documenting in
> policy to allow tools to start to consume it if they like.
>
> Thanks,
> Jonathan
>
> [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2010/07/msg00088.html
>
Reply to: