On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 07:36:11PM +0000, Nicholas Bamber wrote: > I am working on this in license-reconcile. However I really don't see how > this could affect devscripts. devscripts is a core package, > license-reconcile is no such thing,
I thought my reasoning was rather clear: > >But I'm also marking this as affects: devscripts, because I find it > >surprising that the new licensecheck output includes a line for sample.png, > >when the file was explicitly reported as unparseable. It doesn't seem > >desirable to me that licensecheck would list files in its output that are > >definitely not going to have embedded license/copyright information and > >whose copyright information must be listed elsewhere. > >Perhaps we want to make sure the new behavior for licensecheck is settled > >before patching license-reconcile. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
