control: tag -1 +patch On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:39:15AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > The difference between both sources of information is that Homepage is > parseable, and debian/copyright is not. DEP-5 will not solve this > problem: the Source field is more or less free-form. It may contain an > URL, but not necessarly, and if there is an URL it is not guaranteed > to be the one to the sources. Indeed. > When the information is redundant, I would like the Policy to permit > it to be in a single place. This will give a bit of flexibility to > allow for evolutions. I think that the requirement to have the > download URL in the debian/copyright file is one of the reasons why > there is temptation to add other meta-data to it, and I think that it > is not the place for this. Let's remember one of the last sentences of > §12.5: ‘You should not use the copyright file as a general README > file’. Agreed. I am seeking seconds for the following patch. Given what Julian pointed out, it only permits Homepage: to be used, not d/watch. diff --git a/policy/ch-docs.rst b/policy/ch-docs.rst index dc02bc6..d79f732 100644 --- a/policy/ch-docs.rst +++ b/policy/ch-docs.rst @@ -186,8 +186,10 @@ information and distribution license in the file ``/usr/share/doc/package/copyright``. This file must neither be compressed nor be a symbolic link. -In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources (if -any) were obtained, and should include a name or contact address for the +In addition, except in the case where the information would duplicate +exactly the contents of the :ref:`Homepage <s-f-Homepage>` field, the +copyright file must say where the upstream sources (if any) were +obtained, and should include a name or contact address for the upstream authors. This can be the name of an individual or an organization, an email address, a web forum or bugtracker, or any other means to unambiguously identify who to contact to participate in the -- Sean Whitton
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature