On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:59:09AM +0500, Andrey Rahmatullin wrote:
> > Not because we are legally bound to do so, but because we want to do our
> > job as distributors properly. We appreciate good quality packaging!
> It's at least worth a discussion whether nitpicking at d/copyright is
> really helping the package quality at all, and if it's worth it.
I would be interested in having numbers how frequently a d/copyright
file is accessed by users (should be possible to do via popcon
techniques).
A recent example (seqan2, currently in NEW) where I needed to review
lots of copyright statements seems that even upstream is not caring a
lot. I've got an answer via private mail on my question for
clarification[1] that most probably everything else than BSD is simply a
remaining that nobody minded to change.
In short: We have examples where a maintainer spents a lot of time into
things that are matching our formal principles but do not match reality.
In other words: We are serving our princinples but not our users. This
is no vote to drop or relax our principles but sometimes some less
strict handling might be helpful for all involved parties.
BTW, the thread drifted away from copyright information of auto
generated files in binary packages. Did I missed some conclusion
we've found?
Kind regards
Andreas.
[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2016/08/msg00066.html
--
http://fam-tille.de
