Bart Martens <ba...@debian.org> writes: > We know that "authors" are not the same as "copyright holders". > Debian-policy uses "should" for the "authors" and "must" for the > "copyright information".
I don't agree with this interpretation of Debian Policy, and I don't follow it for my own packages. > To be honest, Russ, and no disrespect meant, I'm surprised to see that > someone from the Technical Committee and the Policy team goes so lightly > over mixing "authors" and "copyright holders" and over the importance of > "must" and "should" in debian-policy on debian-mentors. It is, in my > opinion, better to stick to current debian-policy on debian-mentors, and > to debate possible improvements of debian-policy elsewhere. I stepped in and replied in debian-mentors because I think your interpretation of Policy as it is currently written is incorrect. The new package is a substantial improvement over what's in the archive, and the standards to which you're holding it are not standards that we, in general, are expecting of packages in the archive. It's certainly fine for you to follow stricter standards in your own packages and ask for stricter standards in packages you sponsor, but I'm willing to sponsor the package as-is. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87bokamrnv....@windlord.stanford.edu
