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

Re: DEP-5 meta: New co-driver; current issues

On 12.08.2010 16:28, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 08/12/2010 03:27 PM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On to, 2010-08-12 at 14:59 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
On 08/12/2010 02:45 PM, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
  >  It would be good to have DEP-5 done quite early in the squeeze+1
development cycle to give as much time as possible for adoption.

A few comments:
- Personally I find the format unnecessarily complicated and much more annoying
to use than writing a normal debian/copyright file, especially for complicated

You're not required to use it. If you want to improve the format, please
make concrete proposals, or at least explain why it is complicated and
annoying. (If you've already done so, a URL will be sufficient. I do
not, unfortunately, have the time to re-read three years worth of old
discussions about this.)

Its nothing that could be done by improving the format.
Especially in large projects you often have a lot of weird situations reagrding
the licensing, or GPL with various exceptions (not only to allow linking ssl,
there are many more...) and a lot of other weirdness. For me its just faster to
describe the situation in human-parsable words and copy+paste the license.
For small sources or largish sources with one developer and one license it
should not make a difference in the time one needs to spend to write
debian/copyright. Don't understand me wrong, I'm all in favor for making
debian/copyright machine-readable, I just think that there are more important
things to do when you have to decide what to do with your spare time.

But most of discussion is already taken, so now we have DEP-5 for free.
And anyway not we are in frozen time, so I doubt that changes of copyright will be allowed before squeeze release.

IMHO it is good to have some machine parseable format, so we can
compare with other distributions, and probably do some cross-check with licensecheck and fossology (and probably we could generate a template
from such tools).

From few Debconf talks, it seems that corporate users want a better overview of licenses, so a DEP-5 will definitely help us, to gain
again some more visibility.


PS: and transforming a machine parseable format to an other should
be trivial (if the original format is well done).

Reply to: