Hi, On 24/01/10 15:47, Charles Plessy wrote:
The Debian binary packages contain an exhaustive summary of the licenses of the files it contains. This summary also contains a reproduction of the copyright notices when the license require it. Additional documentation is encouraged but not necessary.
I'd like to hear our ftpmasters' opinion on this (CC'ing them). As I expressed some months ago on -devel, I agree with this, but since they may be responsible for what is distributed on our archive (I'm not sure whether they are or not), I don't think forcing this through a GR is the best idea. A lawyer has been consulted AFAIK, so this is already being done (although slowly).
Also, the wording suggests that the requirement to specify where the source was downloaded (and everything else we write on debian/copyright that is neither the license nor the copyright holders) is no longer required, but only encouraged. Is that on purpose? If not, maybe the wording should be changed.
The Debian source packages can contain files that are not free according to our guidelines, provided that they are not used to build nor distributed in the binary packages that constitute the Debian system.
I don't like this one. Rather than ignoring the DFSG, I think it should be changed instead (and I'm against doing so, FWIW).
Cheers, Emilio