On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 05:03:22PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
we maybe should say something about not using the public-domain keyword for things that aren't actually in the public domain but just have a license saying "this is in the public domain" or "you can treat this as if it's in the public domain," since in many countries that use Debian those works are *not* in the public domain.
Ok, I think I get it now. The following was dropped in Bazaar revision 135:
Being in the public domain is not a license. See Linux journal article ["Why the Public Domain Isn't a License"](http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6225) by Lawrence Rosen. If the work is truly public domain, this should be stated in the copyright field.
Would adding that back somewhere be suitable?Personally I would really appreciate if it was a helpful note, not just a limiting one like "don't use this tag unless you really know what it means - and don't trust upstream to know either".
- Jonas http://bzr.debian.org/scm/loggerhead/dep/dep5/trunk/revision/135/dep5.mdwn -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Description: Digital signature