On Monday 30 November 2015 21:06:17 Ferenc Wagner wrote:
> I know of licensecheck,
> but this area really cries for more automation and checking.
I'm working on it. You can try 'cme update dpkg-copyright' or 'scan-
copyrights' provided by libconfig-model-dpkg-perl.
Hopefully these commands will
Vincent Bernat writes:
> ❦ 30 novembre 2015 10:41 +0100, Ferenc Wagner :
>
>> Makefile.in files distributed in an upstream tarball often have several
>> copyright notices: the FSF copyleft at the top added by Automake and
>> later those carried over from other macro packages included into
>> Ma
Alex Vong writes:
> I am not a mentor, the following is just my opinions:
I'm afraid that if you answer a question on debian-mentors, you're a
mentor by definition. :)
> I don't know how Makefile.in is being handled in particular, but I
> think in general, if one file has more than one copyrigh
❦ 30 novembre 2015 10:41 +0100, Ferenc Wagner :
> Makefile.in files distributed in an upstream tarball often have several
> copyright notices: the FSF copyleft at the top added by Automake and
> later those carried over from other macro packages included into
> Makefile.am (for example: include
Hi,
I am not a mentor, the following is just my opinions:
I think if possible, Makefile.in should not be included in tarball,
since dh_autoreconf will re-generate it at build-time anyway. But I
think it is fine to keep it if the upstream tarball provides it since
it does not worth repacking the t
Dear mentors,
Makefile.in files distributed in an upstream tarball often have several
copyright notices: the FSF copyleft at the top added by Automake and
later those carried over from other macro packages included into
Makefile.am (for example: include doxygen.am). The result is like this:
# M
6 matches
Mail list logo
