Le Fri, Feb 03, 2012 at 01:16:08PM -0600, Jonathan Nieder a écrit : > Charles Plessy wrote: > > > For other points, for instance that stand-alone license sections can also > > accept short names accompanied by their license exception, a clarification > > would not hurt; but I do not consider this a blocking problem. > > I believe this should be a blocker --- it is an instance of the > document and actual practice clearly contradicting one another. I > wouldn't mind if it is resolved by forbidding stand-alone license > sections for license exceptions, though, if that's the only way to get > something released. (Of course I would prefer the opposite > resolution.)
I think that the document overlooks rather than forbids the case of standalone paragraphs for licence with exceptions. In that sense I do not see a contradiction, and indeed, I found multiple copyright files in the Lintian lab that use such standalone paragraphs. In parallel, I note that parsers do not refuse standalone paragraph even when they refer to a license listed only once in a Files field. For instance: Files: * Copyright: upstream License: foo Files: */contrib Copyright: somebody else License: bar License: foo The text for foo. License: bar The text for bar. Would you or Ximin like to propose a patch, focused on clarifying that stand-alone license paragraphs are allowed even for mono-licensed works and for licenses with exception ? Have a nice week-end, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120204022633.gb1...@merveille.plessy.net
