On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 11:35:02AM +0000, Neil Williams wrote: > IMHO it is about not getting hung up on the process but considering the > reasoning behind the process. AFAICT, there is no good reason to > document every single copyright holder but there are very good reasons > to document every applicable LICENCE. > > As a sponsor, I do *not* require that every single copyright holder is > listed in debian/copyright. I *do* require that every file in the > source package has been checked for the applicable LICENCE and that all > such LICENCES are declared in debian/copyright along with clear > identification of which files use which licence. Where there is a clear > division between copyright holders and licences, I would expect that > the sections of debian/copyright dealing with files under that licence > specify that the files are Copyright foo rather than Copyright bar > that applies elsewhere. If some names and / or email addresses fall > through the gaps, so be it.
This seems entirely reasonable. If we can include copyright holder names without much trouble then I think we should out of courtesy, but I shouldn't imagine that it must be a requirement. There is no reason why you couldn't adopt this approach with the proposal. -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
