Re: possibly exhausted ftp-masters (Re: Do we still value contributions?
On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 06:01:40PM +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> Quoting Roberto C. Sánchez (2019-12-26 17:29:52)
> > On Thu, Dec 26, 2019 at 04:30:58PM +0100, Thorsten Alteholz wrote:
> > > On Thu, 26 Dec 2019, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > > > So, what does the FTP team consider that we, as the wider
> > > > community of Debian Developers, can do to help?
> [...]
> > > When there is a REJECT and the maintainer used a tool like
> > > licensecheck, file a bug and let the tools become better.
> >
> > One interesting thing about this is that I have often wondered if it
> > would be beneficial to have checks on debian/copyright during the life
> > of a package.
>
> lintian does some continuous checks.
>
> Doing it more aggressively requires (I guess¹) more work than is
> currently available with licensecheck and related tools.
>
>
> > Checking only once when a package first enters the Debian archive
> > seems to leave open the rather likely possibility that some change in
> > a future upstream release changes or adds some component license that
> > should be documented in debian/copyright. I try to be diligent in
> > this regard and even at times have found that I overlook things.
>
> Keeping debian/copyright up-to-date is certainly an important and
> *required* part of package maintenance!
>
> Some use cme for automating this, I currently use licensecheck2dep5 -
> again, please look at https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReviewTools for
> options, and anyone having experience with other approaches please add
> them to that wiki page!
>
>
> > In any event, a tool that can scan a source tree and produce a base
> > debian/copyright file that I as a maintianer could edit would be a
> > marvelous thing. Would be possible to make the licensecheck tool dual
> > use in that way?
>
> You mean this?:
>
> licensecheck --recursive --deb-machine *
>
> Other tools listed at https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReviewTools can
> do similar/related tasks - in particular cme and licensecheck2dep5.
>
>
Thanks for the pointers. I clearly need to update my knowledge
regarding the available options.
Regards,
-Roberto
--
Roberto C. Sánchez
Reply to: