Hi Andreas, Quoting Andreas Cadhalpun (2014-08-09 00:48:05) > > You introduced a default copyright for "INRIA", "Jun Furuse" and "OCamlPro" > > where I tried to name files individually to match the different copyrights. > > For example the only files that are copyright "INRIA" seem to be > > src/approx_tokens.ml, src/approx_lexer.mll and src/approx_common.mli so I > > don't see how "INRIA" can be in the default block. > > There had been no general 'Files: *' stanza and some files (like > Makefile etc.) had not been mentioned explicitly. Therefore I created > the default stanza with the license mentioned in the LICENSE file.
correct, this indeed makes a 'Files: *' stanza necessary or some files will not be matched. > To shorten debian/copyright I merged all the files under this license > into this stanza, which thus mentions all copyright holders. > But if you prefer to list some of them, e.g. those with copyright INRIA, > separately, that is also fine. > > [...] > > Merging all the copyright holders and dates into the default stanza doesn't > mean that all the files are copyrighted by all the listed copyright holders > with the same dates, but rather that at least one of them is copyrighted by > at least one of these copyright holders with one of the dates. > > The copyright format specification makes it clear that whether to merge > or not is just a matter of taste: > "Since the license of the manual pages is the same as the other files in > the package, the last paragraph above could instead be combined with the > first paragraph, listing both copyright statements in one Copyright > field. Whether to combine paragraphs with the same license is left to > the discretion of the author of the debian/copyright file." [a] Okay, I see. Then I agree that merging those stanzas makes things much more maintainable and readable. > You're welcome. By the way, I just notice that 'BSD-3-clause' should have > been 'BSD-3-Clause' (with capital C) as recommended by the copyright format > specification. Indeed. Thanks, I changed that too. > As these have rather permissive licenses, it wouldn't hurt to leave them and > just document there existence in debian/copyright. But if you prefer, it's > also fine to remove them via Files-Excluded. I'll cater for that in a later release. I noticed something else: when you added tests/passing/traverse.mli as being licensed under AGPL-3, is it not necessary to paste the full text of the AGPL-3 because the AGPL cannot be found in /usr/share/common-licenses? I added the text of the AGPL-3 to debian/copyright to fulfill policy ยง 12.5. You can find the full diff of the changes in: http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-ocaml-maint/packages/ocp-indent.git/commit/?id=3316070c3164a14926abd9fcba46b88b8419640c I uploaded the fixed package to mentors and would probably need somebody to upload it for me: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/o/ocp-indent/ocp-indent_1.4.1-2.dsc Thank you for your help! cheers, josch -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140809063325.19236.47183@hoothoot
