On 2009-03-20, Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> wrote: > All of what you've demonstrated is part of what Mike covered with > ???one has to go through all of the source files anyway???, is it not? > The point I got from his message is that, having *already* accepted > the burden of going through all the files, one can then record the > copyright status while doing that.
So far, comaintainers of gnome, kde, webkit, xulrunner and firefox are saying that this is a major extra burden. The kernel team seems to have a full waiver for listing copyright holders. So please listen to the packagers of "big" packages what is a burden and what is not. Trying to look over Ben Finney's packages, the most complex package is "gracie", where Ben is upstream. It is a python package consisting of 1000 lines of sourcecode + 3000 lines of test code. (according to sloccount). Except a single file in the test code, everything is by Ben. Trying to look over some of Mike O'Connor's packages, kxstitch and rosegarden, Kxstitch with one upstream author and bunches of autogenerated files. (the sources are available and the generated tools are GPL, so no real problem, but just not 'good style'). The copyright file does mention this one author. Rosegarden is having many copyright holders, only 3 is mentioned in the copyright file. Most files have a copyright header stating "Copyright is Rosegarden development team", so all in all not that complex from a copyright file point of view. Still, there is many copyright holders missing from debian/copyright. If anyone wants to actually try working with copyright files for one of those "bigger" packages, Mike O'Connor helpfulyl just opened #520485 to track one of them. Patches are welcome. /Sune -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
