Re: Request for review/sponsorship of python-lzma

[Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au>]

Richard Darst <rkd@zgib.net> writes:

> On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:02:23AM -0600, Kumar Appaiah wrote:
> > debian/copyright:
> > * Licensed under LGPLv3+
> > * Please add license headers too.

The header of a DEP 5 copyright file doesn't discuss licenses. What
Kumar seems to be referring to here is the fields in the body stanzas of
that file; you should write enough Files stanzas to cover all the
copyright terms of the work.

Note that conforming with DEP 5 is not required; as it says, “This is
not a proposal to change the policy in the short term”: the proposal is
still only that. Yet it is gaining a lot of support, and can give a good
structure to the copyright file of a package.

> I have them at the bottom of debian/copyright, but I didn't see
> anything that said if or how they have to be separated...

Have a closer read of DEP 5; it describes a header (describing the
package as a whole), and then a body with multiple stanzas. The header
is separated from the body by a blank line, and each stanza in the body
is separated from then next by a blank line.

DEP 5 also forbids anything in that file which *isn't* the header or the
body stanzas; if you're going to conform with DEP 5, put all the
information into the structured format described there.

-- 
 \       “If consumers even know there's a DRM, what it is, and how it |
  `\     works, we've already failed.” —Peter Lee, Disney corporation, |
_o__)                                                             2005 |
Ben Finney