On Fri, 27 Jul 2018 at 17:18:42 +0800, Sean Whitton wrote: > If we want to implement anything like what's being discussed > in #883950, we need section 12.5 to state explicitly that the license > grant need not be included.
<https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=883950#80> suggests that the license grant is no longer required, which appears to be a change in ftp team requirements since the previous official statement <https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg00023.html>, which said: "Its not enough to have the following two-liner ["On Debian systems", etc.]. There are license headers [license grants], you should use those". ftp team: has the requirement to reproduce license grants for (some?) licenses in d/copyright changed since 2006, or am I misunderstanding the statement in #883950? To make things easier, here are some possible policies that the ftp team might reasonably choose: * For common-licenses, d/copyright must include ( ) at least one of: a well-known license identifier like "GPL-2+" or a reference to common-licenses ("On Debian systems", etc.) ( ) a reference to common-licenses, and also at least one of: a well-known license identifier like "GPL-2+", or a license grant ( ) both a license grant and a reference to common-licenses ( ) something else (please specify) * For licenses not available in common-licenses, d/copyright must include ( ) the full text of the license ( ) the full text of the license, *and* the license grant (unless the license *is* the license grant, like BSD-style licenses) ( ) something else (please specify) Thanks, smcv
