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

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

Quoting Paul Wise (2014-09-19 05:46:12)
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Jonathan Dowlandwrote:
>> But how do you feel about the slightly different situation of 
>> shipping a pristine tarball but not performing an autoreconf (etc 
>> etc) prior to ./configure -- thus deviating from the "normal" process 
>> of building that package from source? At least it's very clear how an 
>> autoconf-output-stripped tarball is going to be built.
> We should be moving towards this:
> Pristine upstream tarballs.
> Build tools automatically removing generated files (including 
> autotools files) and unmodified embedded code copies (including 
> autotools related files, m4 macros etc).

Agreed, but we must still respect copyright and licensing for all code 
that we distribute - also what we distribute in source form, even if 
regenerated during build.

How do we ensure that we respect copyright and licensing if we do not 
even bother to register what it is?

If some copyright and licensing need no "verbatim copy verbatim copy of 
its copyright information and distribution license", I believe that 
should be explicitly stated in Debian Policy §12.5 (and I guess that's 
also what ftpmasters would need for changing their current practise).

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reply to: