Hello, I'm currently doing a review of a package Franciscarlos sent to me, and I stumbled upon an interesting case which I would like to ask advise about on this list.
The package in question is adapta-gtk-theme[0], tools like licensecheck generate d/copyright as: License: GPL-2+ or CC-BY-SA-4.0+ Looking at the files of the software, Example of that is that some files like .sh ones are GPL-2+ and some .svg are CC-BY-SA-4.0+. I'm assuming this can be solved by: Files: * Copyright: YEARS NAME License: GPL-2+ Files: *.svg Copyright: YEARS NAME License: CC-BY-SA-4.0+ Although part of the build process consists of generating some png files from the svg ones, and by using the above I would be licensing them as GPL-2+, so... Files: * Copyright: YEARS NAME License: GPL-2+ Files: *.svg *.png Copyright: YEARS NAME License: CC-BY-SA-4.0+ Should be able to do it, right? I'm not sure about the multiple entries on the Files, I can't see a mention of that in DEP3[1]. Considering that the d/copyright above is ok, there's still one thing missing, upstream don't explicitly mentions any license for png files, so am I correct that as long as we respect the svg license, we can chose the one we want to for the pngs and upstream doesn't have to care about that? And in that case, the license would obviously be the same as of the svg. Oh, there is another thing, upstream does not mention its name on any of the svg files, it don't even mention the proper license on the file[2], the only place where there's [kinda] clearly attribution of license to svg files is on the README.md[3]. Considering only this aspect, I would like advice on what I should suggest upstream to change in order to explicitly license its svgs (I would be glad to see examples on other softwares), it looks like upstream could be using other RDF fields on the svg for that[4]. And now considering that upstream still didn't made this changes, I could upload the package to Debian, right? I understand that the license could be more explicit but having it that way on README.md and on the other files seems like enough for a first upload, what do you think? [0]https://salsa.debian.org/debian/adapta-gtk-theme [1]https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#files-field [2]https://salsa.debian.org/debian/adapta-gtk-theme/blob/6aa1f96171de5c8a3a45795c5153ade4e995a3fa/wm/asset/assets-xfwm/hide-inactive.svg#L6 [3]https://salsa.debian.org/debian/adapta-gtk-theme/blob/6aa1f96171de5c8a3a45795c5153ade4e995a3fa/README.md#L355 [4]https://creativecommons.org/ns# Regards, -- Samuel Henrique <samueloph>
