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

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



On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 10:14:01AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> 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.

Erm... and what would Joey Hess put there for a native package, where
the *source* is obtained from, well, the Debian archive? :)

> > (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.

G'luck,
Peter

-- 
Peter Pentchev	roam@ringlet.net     roam@FreeBSD.org      roam@cpan.org
PGP key:	http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc
Key fingerprint	FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E  DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553
This sentence contains exactly threee erors.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: