Hi Stefano, On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 12:48:04PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Bonus note on the current DEP-5 draft, quoting from it:
> * License > # First line: licence name(s) in abbreviated format (see Short > names section). If empty, it is given the default value ‘other’ > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > So, an empty License (first line) means "other" license, to be detailed > later on with a License stanza. > Given that you can always factorize out annoying / bothersome license > blocks using License stanzas, this limitation does not look like > particularly severe to me. > Question on this (because the current draft does not look particularly > clear on that topic, at least to my own reading): is it true that > arbitrary keywords can be used in License fields to reference license > blocks expanded later on or not? In particular, I'm worried about the > case where there are different "other" licenses in a given package, that > still need to be reused. Can we in those cases use, e.g., "other1", > "other2", etc., or possibly even more telling names? Yes, it's intended that a License: field with an arbitrary keyword can be used to refer to a later License block. If this isn't clear, can you suggest improvements to the text? -- 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
