On 10/06/10 22:13, Russ Allbery wrote: > I therefore propose proceeding as follows: > > 1. Add a new Lintian warning asking people to stop using the > common-licenses link for the BSD license and instead include the > license directly in debian/copyright. As we've discussed in the past, > this is the best course of action for short and simple licenses, > particularly ones that can have some wording difference. The BSD > license isn't long enough to warrant the extra indirection. The > warning can also mention that the license isn't appropriate for code > that isn't owned by the University of California. > > 2. Apply the patch to Policy included below, which removes this license > from the list of licenses we tell people to reference from > /usr/share/common-licenses and explains why. > > 3. Based on the Lintian results, watch the count of packages using this > reference and, if it gets low enough, clean up the rest with a mass bug > filing and then drop the file from base-files.
That sounds good to me. > Any further discussion? I'm also looking for seconds for the Policy patch > below: > > diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml > index 87b9795..02d6f8d 100644 > --- a/policy.sgml > +++ b/policy.sgml > @@ -9227,14 +9227,13 @@ END-INFO-DIR-ENTRY > </p> > > <p> > - Packages distributed under the UCB BSD license, the Apache > - license (version 2.0), the Artistic license, the GNU GPL > - (version 2 or 3), the GNU LGPL (versions 2, 2.1, or 3), and the > - GNU FDL (versions 1.2 or 1.3) should refer to the corresponding > - files under <file>/usr/share/common-licenses</file>,<footnote> > + Packages distributed under the Apache license (version 2.0), the > + Artistic license, the GNU GPL (version 2 or 3), the GNU LGPL > + (versions 2, 2.1, or 3), and the GNU FDL (versions 1.2 or 1.3) > + should refer to the corresponding files > + under <file>/usr/share/common-licenses</file>,<footnote> > <p> > In particular, > - <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/BSD</file>, > <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/Apache-2.0</file>, > <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/Artistic</file>, > <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2</file>, > @@ -9244,7 +9243,14 @@ END-INFO-DIR-ENTRY > <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-3</file>, > <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/GFDL-1.2</file>, and > <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/GFDL-1.3</file> > - respectively. > + respectively. The University of California BSD license is > + also included in <package>base-files</package> as > + <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/BSD</file>, but given the > + brevity of this license, its specificity to code whose > + copyright is held by the Regents of the Univesrity of > + California, and the frequency of minor wording changes, its > + text should be included in the copyright file rather than > + referencing this file. > </p> > </footnote> rather than quoting them in the copyright > file. > Seconded. Cheers, Emilio
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
