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

DEP-5 (copyright file format) ... gap with practice


DEP-5 as defined in  http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/ does not have any
clause allowing us to skip license entries for certain class of files.

In practice, many packages lack entries for autotools generated files
which come with very permissive license with mostly identical but not
quite the same copyright phrases which reqire us to quote them

I am talking about autotools files such as:
 * */Makefile.in
 * m4/*.m4
 * configure
 * aclocal.m4
GPL-2.0+ with autoconf exception
 * compile
 * depcomp
 * missing
 * py-compile
 * test-driver
 * m4/introspection.m4
 * m4/intltool.m4
GPL-2.0+ with libtool exception
 * ltmain.sh
GPL-3.0+ with autoconf exception
 * config.sub
 * config.guess
 * install-sh

( I think the following must not be skipped.)
(  LGPL-2.0+                                )
(  * m4/vapigen.m4                          )

FTP master people seem not to worry such loose practice of drop listing

This gap between policy and practice is the problem for tools handling

My debmake package is one of it.  It helps to
 * create the template copyright file and 
 * check the previous copyright file against the updated source tree.
Currently my debmake package pedantically lists and requires them per
policy; and generates the long template copyright file.(*1)

By having such useless entries per policy is not really useful for the
license compliance check purpose and requires extra editorial work for
no real benefit.  (More noise!)

It may be good to have a set of specifically defined file types for
exclusion in DEP-5 policy.  Then we can skip listing them in the
copyright file.  The helper script can generate a template for the
copyright file in line with the actual practice and not to contradict
with the DEP-5 policy.



(*1) The ibus package used the debmake and lists such files.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: