Michael Gilbert <mgilb...@debian.org> writes: > On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Michael Gilbert wrote: >> Would it be unreasonable if someone were to start an >> "uncommon-licenses" package? Then any package depending on that could >> use a reference to the license instead of including the full text in >> debian/copyright. > > I realize that this misses a certain aspect of interpreting the > legalize of licenses, which is that many believe the full text of a > license needs to accompany all source and binary files. > > So then an additional aspect of this solution could be a helper that > takes a copyright.in containing license file references and replaces > that with the appropriate full text.
I can add support for something like this to dh-exec, but the usage will be slightly awkward, since executable debian/copyright is not supported, but an executable debian/$package.docs is. So I can write a dh-exec tool that pulls in the right license for you, and all you need to do to use it, is to not have a debian/copyright in the source, but (for example) a debian/copyright.in, and this in your debian/$package.docs: ,---- | #! /usr/bin/dh-exec --with=copyright-magic | debian/copyright.in | copyright-magic | README.md | whatever-else-you want `---- Of course the syntax would have to change a bit to make more sense, but I have a bus to catch. It might even be possible to have a debian/copyright and overwrite it via debian/$package.docs, but I haven't verified if that would work. -- |8D -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87havs3qa5.fsf@algernon.balabit
