Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't think the copyright file should explain the modifications made > in the Debian package compared to the upstream one. The purpose of > the changelog.Debian(.gz) file is to describe such changes (and any > others), so this is a needless duplication of text.
Of course, the reason that the changes are now required in two places is because the copyright file (and the changes that are supposed to be documented in it) predates the changelog file. The changelog file wasn't required until mid-1996. Nevertheless, it has always been my opinion that the two were not supposed to serve the same purpose. The purpose of the changelog file is to document the difference between successive versions of the Debian package. They are listed in the chronological order that the changes occur. The purpose of the "modifications" section of the copyright file is to be a *summary* of the changes that have been made to the upstream sources to debianize the package. I have always considered the copyright file as the place to go when one needed to determine what has been done to the upstream sources by the Debian maintainer. (In one sense, it is a summary of the .diff.gz file). It is certainly easier to get that information from the text that is supposed to be recorded in the copyright file than it is to wade through pages and pages of confusing changelog entries. > Also, this means that the maintainer has to update the copyright file > if he makes another or removes an existing modification, which I don't > think we should need to do, since we already have the Debian changelog > file. I agree that the modification list in the copyright file does impose an extra burden on the maintainer. I'm not sure that all of these lists in my packages are up to date. - Brian
