Package: debian-policy Severity: normal Version: 3.6.2.2 File: http://www.us.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-docs.html#s-copyrightfile
On Sat, Mar 04, 2006 at 12:14:29PM +0100, Bas Wijnen wrote: > On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 11:41:59PM +0100, Andrea Bolognani wrote: > > > * W: The program is licensed under GPL version 2. > > > > Will not fix. From the Policy, section 12.5: > > > > "Packages distributed under the UCB BSD license, the Artistic license, > > the GNU GPL, and the GNU LGPL should refer to the files > > /usr/share/common-licenses/BSD, > > /usr/share/common-licenses/Artistic, /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL, and > > /usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL respectively" > > > > So /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL is the right file to point to. "according to policy" > Perhaps Policy needs an upgrade here... It seems logical to me that you must > always point to the license which is used. In case of "GPL version 2 or > later", that is usually understood as "the latest version of the GPL" > (although of course the user may choose to use an earlier version, as long as > it's at least version 2). This is what the GPL symlink is for: it always > points to the latest version. A program which is "GPL v2 only" is of course > not licensed under "the latest version", but under v2. The fact that they are > currently the same is irrelevant: they are conceptually different. Agree. > So the GPL symlink is simply the wrong thing to point at, because it isn't the > license which is used (because it's "the latest version", not "version 2"). > Appearantly policy isn't so clear about the /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2, > but it being there strongly suggests that it should be used for programs which > are licensed under "GPL v2 only". Agree. While we're at it, section 2.3 uses the phrase "BSD-like copyrights" which should be "BSD-like licenses". #336982 against dh-make is mildly related. Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
