On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Bart Martens wrote: > I would regret that the new debian/copyright format would become a jessie > release goal. The cost/benefit ratio is, in my opinion, very low. It costs > quite some human time to recode the upstream copyright and license > information, > and I have not yet seen the benefit of more easy parsing by software. The > licenses in the upstream source code are already in text, so they are already > in a format suitable for parsing by software. In 2013 I don't see the need > for > humans to recode text to be even more easily parseable by software. Our human > time would be better spent on developing tools to extract the copyright and > license information from the upstream sources, in my opinion. If we develop a > really smart tool, then most debian/copyright can be fully generated > automatically in a format designed to be well readable by humans.
You may be interested in fossology, which was semi-recently removed from Debian: http://www.fossology.org/ http://packages.qa.debian.org/f/fossology.html Another one is Ninka: https://github.com/dmgerman/ninka It turns out that automatic license identification is a "hard" problem: https://lwn.net/Articles/547400/ -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- 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/CAKTje6FCTMZjd7SgPe3+W35X_Lk3LCVzDBZcPBq=2yecwtk...@mail.gmail.com
