Bug#768292: Let's add the MPLs to /usr/share/common-licenses ? (was Re: Bug#768292: debian-policy: please allow copyright file to refer to license text in separate files)
Le Sun, Nov 09, 2014 at 09:13:21AM -0800, Russ Allbery a écrit :
>
> > How about adding both MPLs to /usr/share/common-licenses ?
>
> Given those numbers, I think we should. And possibly also CC-BY-SA 3.0
> while we're at it.
Hi Russ,
I fully agree.
For the avoidance of doubt, I have also counted the numbers for other CC
licenses; here is the result.
AGPL 3 294
Apache 2.0 4740
Artistic 3811
Artistic 2.0 195
BSD (common-licenses) 347
CC-BY 1.0 11
CC-BY 2.0 1
CC-BY 2.5 33
CC-BY 3.0 311
CC-BY-SA 1.0 2
CC-BY-SA 2.0 32
CC-BY-SA 2.5 16
CC-BY-SA 3.0 883
CC-BY-SA 4.0 23
CDDL 504
CeCILL 54
CeCILL-B 50
CeCILL-C 33
GFDL (any) 2155
GFDL (symlink) 539
GFDL 1.2 1074
GFDL 1.3 619
GPL (any) 40659
GPL (symlink) 7641
GPL 1 3657
GPL 2 25546
GPL 3 11363
LGPL (any) 18315
LGPL (symlink) 2466
LGPL 2 14666
LGPL 2.1 10422
LGPL 3 2644
LaTeX PPL 76
LaTeX PPL (any) 197
LaTeX PPL 1.3c 184
MPL 1.1 1146
MPL 2.0 847
SIL OFL 1.0 13
SIL OFL 1.1 567
Total number of packages: 73292
By the way, would you and the other Policy editors mind if I would save these
numbers in the Git repository, for insance in a text file named
tools/license-check.latest.txt ? This way, it will be easier to keep an eye
on the evolution of these numbers.
As far as I could see with search engine, the previous number for MPL-1.1 was
740.
https://lists.debian.org/debian-policy/2011/12/msg00130.html
For the CC licenses, it was:
CC-BY 3.0 68
CC-BY-SA 3.0 133
https://bugs.debian.org/662649#31
Before taking final action, shall we consider adding also CC-BY 3.0 (not as
popular as the SA variant, but this may avoid some errors), and the 4.0 version
of the licenses ?
The rationale for using the 4.0 version is that if their use increases like for
the 3.0 versions (and I would be surprised if not), then waiting to add them to
/usr/share/common-licenses is giving double work to the maintainers: first they
have to include them in debian/copyright, and then they will have to remove
them. This said, I do not have a strong opinion.
Once this is discussed, I will propose a patch to the Policy. After it is properly
seconded, I will ping the Lintian maintainers (please remind me if I forget).
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: