Bug#884223: debian-policy: please add AGPL-3.0 to common licenses

[Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>]

Hi,

Markus Koschany wrote:
> Am 13.12.2017 um 19:10 schrieb Jonathan Nieder:
>> Markus Koschany wrote:

>>> License: AGPL-3.0
>>> Source: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.de.html
>>> Example packages:
>>> https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#GNU_AFFERO_GENERAL_PUBLIC_LICENSE_.28AGPL-3.29
>>
>> What commonly installed packages use this license?  Is ghostscript the
>> only one, or are there others?
>
> Actually my idea was not to distinguish between "commonly installed"
> packages and simply "used in packages" anymore. Maintainers will roughly
> save the same amount of time by not copying this license.

This seems odd to me.  Wouldn't copying upstream's LICENSE file
verbatim be the action that involves the least amount of time?  I have
always assumed common-licenses is about disk space and transfer time
savings, not maintainer time savings.

> Apart from my example packages you can find this license also in the
> following packages: Just go to codesearch.debian.net and use
>
>  AGPL path:debian/copyright
>
> as your search query. Notable packages are pulseaudio, debian-goodies,
> gnutls28, pelican, and many more. I expect that more network or web
> applications will use this license in the future.

Thanks.  The example in pulseaudio is the bug fixed upstream that I
mentioned before (src/utils/qpaeq had a different license from the
rest of the package; they've fixed it now).

I remain neutral on this change.  I'm not against it, but not
enthusiastic about it, and look forward to hearing others' thoughts on
it before seconding.

Sincerely,
Jonathan