On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 09:27:30AM +0000, Simon McVittie wrote: > I think the License-Grant field is a useful addition to the format, > resolving some issues around whether License is meant to be the license, > the license grant or both, and I would like to be able to start using it.
I strongly disagree with this. I think this adds more syntax without adding any more information. The License: field is already very consistently used to contain whatever details of the license are required to be shipped with the package - either a full text of a license, or a license grant with a pointer to /usr/share/common-licenses. If people feel that it's insufficiently obvious that this is the correct usage of the field, by all means, let's document that better; but let's not make a backwards-incompatible change to the syntax that doesn't benefit users of the file. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
