Bug#955005: Relax requirements to copy copyright notices into d/copyright

[Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>]

Hi!

On Sun, 2020-04-05 at 17:54:01 -0700, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Here's a patch for seconding, and for the FTP Team to approve.  Thanks
> to Scott for prompting the "all copies" amendation.

> diff --git a/policy/ch-archive.rst b/policy/ch-archive.rst
> index b8ba081..4217dd4 100644
> --- a/policy/ch-archive.rst
> +++ b/policy/ch-archive.rst
> @@ -184,15 +184,32 @@ Copyright considerations
>  ------------------------
[…]
> +The copyright information for files in a package must be copied
> +verbatim into ``/usr/share/doc/package/copyright``, when
                                  ^ Shouldn't this and other instances
of "package" be marked as replaceable text?

> +
> +#. the distribution license for those files requires that copyright
> +   information be included in all copies and/or binary distributions;

I'm assuming the entire list is supposed to hold at the same time? If
so perhaps adding an «and» here would make this completely unambiguous.

> +#. the files are shipped in the binary package, either in source or
> +   compiled form; and
> +
> +#. the form in which the files are present in the binary package does
> +   not include a plain text version of their copyright notices.
> +
> +Thus, the copyright information for files in the source package which
> +are only part of its build process, such as autotools files, need not
> +be included in ``/usr/share/doc/package/copyright``, because those
> +files do not get installed into the binary package.  Similarly, plain
> +text files which include their own copyright information and are
> +installed into the binary package unmodified need not have that
> +copyright information copied into ``/usr/share/doc/package/copyright``
> +
> +However, the copyright notices for any files which are compiled into
> +the object code shipped in the binary package must all be included in
> +d/copyright when the license requires that copyright information be

I'm don't think abbreviating debian/ as d/ is appropriate in policy?
(Personally I fint it annoying also on debian/changelog, because then
you need to search using multiple variants of the filenames, but meh. :)

Thanks,
Guillem