Hello,
as part of packaging "pylatexenc" [1], I'm unsure on how to properly
declare the license attribution of one of the files in the upstream package.
Upstream mentions that the file
("pylatexenc/latexencode/_uni2latexmap_xml.py" [2]) is:
# Automatically generated from unicode.xml by gen_xml_dic.py
although the "unicode.xml" file itself it is not included in the release
tarball. It is present in their repository, along with its license [3]
(and highlighted in the README, which seems to be W3C.
My initial attempt to convey this information in d/copyright [4] tries
to reflect:
1. the "_uni2latexmap_xml.py" is a derivative of the "unicode.xml", and
as a result is covered by the same W3C license.
2. the "_uni2latexmap_xml.py" is also covered by the MIT license, as the
rest of the files in the package.
3. the "unicode.xml.LICENSE" needs to be copied verbatim in d/copyright
in order to cover all the details.
However, I'm not familiar with the W3C license (nor with d/copyright
finer points). Would it be possible to have advise on whether the
assumptions and the current d/copyright is suitable - and help on
correcting otherwise?
Best regards,
[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=950664
[2]
https://github.com/phfaist/pylatexenc/blob/v2.10/pylatexenc/latexencode/_uni2latexmap_xml.py
[3]
https://github.com/phfaist/pylatexenc/blob/v2.10/tools/unicode.xml.LICENSE
[4]
https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/python-pylatexenc/-/blob/105ecb9bb8f96b8d253bf8244fd17617af6ea9d2/debian/copyright#L14
--
Diego M. Rodriguez
