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

Bug#769818: Bug#766118: lintian: False positive for “missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright”


[ Charles, please keep some relevant context when replying to a bug
  report, “bts -m show ######” can help. ]

Le 18/04/2015 02:25, Charles Plessy a écrit :

> regarding the tag "missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright", I think, like
> Martin, that it should not be triggered by multi-line License fields in the
> header paragraph.

Let’s try again: I assumed the error pointed by Lintian in Martin
example has nothing to do with multi-line License fields (it even points
at line 7, i.e, the beginning of the only paragraph different than the
header), but to the fact that no files (besides those inside the
debian/* directory) have their license and copyright documented.

> The fact that License fields in header paragraphs are used
> for a different purpose than License fields in Files paragraphs does not change
> that point.

I assumed what lintian is actually pointing is the missing “Files: *”
paragraph (instead of inaccurately using the header paragraph to
document the main license), or any variant of it (e.g., documenting
every files or directories in their own “Files” paragraph, as debian/*
already is).



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: