Best wishes to all readers for the new year. On Mon, Jan 07, 2013 at 11:13:16PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > From my point of view we should now discuss first what way to > prefer: Either the 'Files-Excluded' field or 'License: > not-shipped-by-debian' should be used and we should decide now > before we keep on implementing it. I have a clear preference but for > sure I'm biased and I'm waiting for other opinions.
I realize that the main assumption motivating the license ugly trick was plainly wrong: a new header will *not* break the existing format and parsers. Thanks for your patient and moderated answers. On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 09:00:49AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > I think that it would be preferrable to refrain from adding special > keywords to the License field, to guarantee that it contains only > license information. > I would therefore recommend using the Files-Excluded field. Agreed, with regrets… > Also, I think that keeping all the information in a single header > field will ease your development to get popularity and support. This would not be decisive. One single exclusion paragraph after all license paragraphs is equivalent to a "Files-Excluded" header field. Moreover, this position is more consistent with the overall structure: "The last paragraph that matches a particular file applies to it.". Before renouncing to a consistent use of the format expressivity for documentation of upstream files licence or removal, I would like your first reactions about modifying the format towards the direction suggested by this pseudo-patch. = Paragraphs = -There are three kinds of paragraphs. +There are four kinds of paragraphs. The first paragraph in the file is called the header paragraph. -Every other paragraph is either a Files paragraph or a stand-alone License paragraph. +Every other paragraph is either a Files paragraph, a stand-alone License paragraph or a file removal paragraph. +== File removal paragraph (optional, repeatable) == + +A file removal paragraph, if any, may document why and how some +upstream files were excluded from the Debian package. + +The following fields may be present in a file removal paragraph. + - Files: required. + - Removed-By: required. + - Comment: optional. + +=== Example file removal paragraph === + +Files: * +Copyright: 1975-2010 Ulla Upstream +License: GPL-2+ + +Files: non-free/* +Removed-By: uscan(1) = Fields = == Files == -Whitespace-separated list: list of patterns indicating files covered by the license and copyright specified in this paragraph. +Whitespace-separated list: list of patterns indicating files covered by this paragraph. +== Removed-By == + +Single-line: tool used to remove the file from upstream release. +Possible values: "uscan(1)", "git-import-orig(1) --filter-pristine-tar option", "pkg-perl"… -- 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/20130111165120.GA3442@pegase
