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

Re: DEP5: CANDIDATE and ready for use in squeeze+1

Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> writes:

> Native packages tend to have no upstream sources, so for most of the
> 200 or so native packages that I am involved in, I have no such thing
> in copyright, and I think that policy allows that. Anything I can
> think of to put in the source field seems redundant or pointless
> boilerplate -- which I'd rather avoid having in the 200-odd native
> packages I am involved with in Debian.

Why is it redundant? The copyright file is the canonical place for that
information, from what I can tell. That's my understanding of why it's
required (by Policy and by the DEP-5 format) to record it there.

> (Of course, the Source field is also redundant for a great many
> packages where it would be the same URL that goes in debian/control's
> Homepage field. IIRC, the hope is that policy is eventually changed to
> not require the copyright have that redundant information.)

I disagree on that point. The home page of the project is a different
fact from the description of where the source was obtained. If they
happen to be the same, that doesn't obviate recording both facts.

 \        “That's the essence of science: Ask an impertinent question, |
  `\            and you're on the way to the pertinent answer.” —Jacob |
_o__)                             Bronowski, _The Ascent of Man_, 1973 |
Ben Finney

Attachment: pgptwhwhpEKOK.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: