Re: dep5 appendix wording
Le Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 01:54:31PM -0400, David Bremner a écrit :
>
> Liw suggested I direct this comment on DEP5 to this list.
>
> In the appendix of the DEP5 candidate, it is written:
>
> ,----
> | The Debian Policy (§12.5) demands that each package is accompanied by a
> | file, debian/copyright in source packages and
> | /usr/share/doc/package/copyright in binary packages, that contains a
> | verbatim copy of its copyright and distribution license. In addition, it
> | requires that copyrights must be extractable by mechanical means.
> `----
>
> In the context of DEP-5, I read that last sentence as suggesting that
> machine interpretable copyright files are mandated by policy. I would
> suggest s/copyrights/copyright files/ to prevent others being confused
> by this. Probably something similar should be done to policy 12.5,
> where the wording was borrowed from, since "copyrights" alone is
> ambigious there as well.
Dear David and everybody,
I think that it is a good idea to clarify the Policy. Would you like to open a
bug or shall I ?
I actually wonder if the DEP's appendix is really needed… I think that it
appeared when I tried to un-brand the proposal. But this was eventually given
up.
There is another Policy change in the pipeline (seconded by there persons) for
dropping the ‘should’ requirement to document the original packagers: see
http://bugs.debian.org/593533
After this change is applied, I propose to remove the appendix entirely. We can
add a hyperlink to Policy §12.5 in the ‘File syntax’ section to compensate.
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: