Paul Wise <p...@debian.org> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
>> BTW, -1 for duplicating information as Upstream-Contact in d/upstream
>> as long as it resides in d/copyright. I'm fine if this field is moved
>> from d/copyright to d/upstream but I'm against having the same value in
>> two different files.
> I guess Upstream-Contact was put into debian/copyright because
> debian/upstream didn't exist at the time DEP-5 was being written.
Upstream-Contact was put into DEP-5 because it was already required
contents in debian/copyright according to Policy, which says:
Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its copyright
information and distribution license in the file
/usr/share/doc/package/copyright. This file must neither be compressed
nor be a symbolic link.
In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources
(if any) were obtained, and should name the original authors.
> Upstream-Name/Upstream-Copyright should be deprecated in
> DEP-5/copyright-format-1.0 and put in debian/upstream.
Upstream-Name and Upstream-Contact should not be deprecated in the
copyright format unless that part of Policy is changed through the normal
Policy process, which will require dealing with the reasons why we have
required the provenance of the upstream source be documented in
debian/copyright and finding a good alternative solution that can be
similarly required. It may well be that debian/upstream is that good
alternative solution, but note that it needs to be required at the should
level to be a replacement for that Policy requirement.
--
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
--
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/878v1t1w54....@windlord.stanford.edu
