On Saturday, November 9, 2019 3:05:21 PM EST Ole Streicher wrote: > Hi Scott, > > Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> writes: > > I'd like to suggest thinking about this from the perspective of new > > contributors. Copyright-format 1.0 has a lot of specific requirements. > > Do we really want to recommend that before someone can package software > > for Debian they need to learn this too (hint: I think no - there's plenty > > to learn to get started that's actually necessary). > > I am surprised here, since I would recommend exactly the opposite: For a > beginner, a well-structured format is much better to fill in than a "The > copyright must be somehow documented in d/copyright". > > CF1.0 helps since it makes clear which information to put there, one > doesn't have to think about the structure etc. Especially with the help > of the sponsor. > > Following magic rules really helps starting to contribute.
I think there are enough "Oh, you missed a colon here, please fix and I'll review again" in Debian packaging without adding more. Fundamentally, copyright-format 1.0 adds a pile of possible things to get wrong that are actually in no way relevant to the purpose of debian/copyright. Focusing on form over function isn't the first thing contributors need to learn. Scott K
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
