Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> writes: > I now have: > > <para> > Even where licenses are DFSG-free and mutually compatible, users may > wish for a way to identify software under certain licenses (if, for > example, they have special reasons to avoid certain licenses). > </para>
Yes, that's good. > That got me pointed in the right direction. How about this? > > <para> > The <varname>Copyright</varname> and <varname>License</varname> > fields in the <emphasis>header paragraph</emphasis> may complement > but do not replace the <emphasis>Files paragraphs</emphasis>. If > present, they summarise the copyright notices or redistribution > terms for the package as a whole. For example, when a work > combines a permissive and a copyleft license, > <varname>License</varname> can be used to clarify the license > terms for the combination. <varname>Copyright</varname> and > <varname>License</varname> together can also be used to document a > <emphasis>compilation copyright</emphasis> and license. It is > possible to use only <varname>License</varname> in the header > paragraph, but <varname>Copyright</varname> alone makes no sense. > </para> Makes much more sense to me than previous versions. Thanks for the work. -- \ “It is clear that thought is not free if the profession of | `\ certain opinions makes it impossible to earn a living.” | _o__) —Bertrand Russell, _Free Thought and Official Propaganda_, 1928 | Ben Finney <b...@benfinney.id.au> -- 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/87vcmsrhwk....@benfinney.id.au
