* Sune Vuorela [130512 12:43]:
> It is too much work for far too little gain. What *is* the gain?
> What is the gain of copyright files?
One big gain of a copyright file is the act of doing it.
For software to be distributable every copyright owner has to have
given his permission. To know that
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 07:52:25PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Being able to write tools to extract the license of any given package.
Well, extract what the maintainer thought the license was when they wrote
debian/copyright. What correlation that has with reality is an open question.
--
To
On 2013-05-13, Robert Collins wrote:
> The use cases are not at all fringe: every company I have worked at since
> open source became the dominant source of libraries has had some set of
> rules and policies around which licenses to use when, and good data about
> that makes decision making easier
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Robert Collin wrote:
> Wearing my HP hat - ... This is a large component of why Fossology
> was born - http://www.fossology.org/projects/fossology/wiki/About_Us.
While you are wearing a HP/Fossology hat, how about reintroducing
fossology to Debian? I guess discus
Le Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:31:00AM +1200, Robert Collins a écrit :
> Sadly
> On 13 May 2013 00:00, "Sune Vuorela" wrote:
>
> > How many hours of developer time is it worth to spend to accomplish
> > these, in my opinion, real fringe use cases ?
>
> Let me start out by saing that I'm not at all
Sadly
On 13 May 2013 00:00, "Sune Vuorela" wrote:
> How many hours of developer time is it worth to spend to accomplish
> these, in my opinion, real fringe use cases ?
>
Let me start out by saing that I'm not at all a fan of the machine readable
copyright files - it seems to me there has to b
Sune wrote:
>
>I fought quite hard against the copyright file format but was promised
>that it wouldn't be something required.
>I do think it is sad that people are already changing minds now.
Agreed. It's a nice-to-have for the the people that care, but that's
all.
--
Steve McIntyre, Cambridge,
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 09:20:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 07:52:25PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>
> > > I fought quite hard against the copyright file format but was promised
> > > that it wouldn't be something required.
>
> > At least *I* never did such promise.
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 07:52:25PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > I fought quite hard against the copyright file format but was promised
> > that it wouldn't be something required.
> At least *I* never did such promise.
I certainly did make the point that having a standard, machine-parseable
c
On 2013-05-12, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Being able to write tools to extract the license of any given package.
> For example, we could see packages.d.o exposing the license of
> any giving software. That would be really nice! A way better than
> just linking to the copyright file. Or being able to
On 05/12/2013 06:43 PM, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> On 2013-05-12, Thomas Goirand wrote:
>> archive to know what kind of license we're using. If we all work
>> a bit on our own packages, it should be fine, and at some
>> point, we should move forward. But does anyone think it is
>> too much work? I woul
On 2013-05-12, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> archive to know what kind of license we're using. If we all work
> a bit on our own packages, it should be fine, and at some
> point, we should move forward. But does anyone think it is
> too much work? I would understand that point of view.
It is too much w
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Bart Martens wrote:
> I would regret that the new debian/copyright format would become a jessie
> release goal. The cost/benefit ratio is, in my opinion, very low. It costs
> quite some human time to recode the upstream copyright and license
> information,
> and
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 01:43:31PM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Since it ever existed, I wrote my debian/copyright file using the
> new format. It's quite well established, and it isn't hard to do
> the switch. It is just a bit boring work though.
>
> I do think it would be nice to be able to pa
On 05/06/2013 08:49 PM, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> now might be the right time to start a discussion about release goals
> for jessie. Here are some points that come into my mind right now (and
> some were already discussed very recently):
>
> * multiarch compatible binNMUs
> * discarding ma
15 matches
Mail list logo
