On 14900 March 1977, Markus Koschany wrote:
> Allow the use of the short-license identifier only in the form:
> Files: foo.bar
> Copyright: 2017, Smith
> License: [GPL-2+]
> without the extra standalone paragraph which will mean exactly the
> same as
> License: GPL-2+
> On Debian systems the ful
Dear FTP team,
the Policy editors request your attention and a decision regarding
Debian bug #883950: debian-policy: allow specifying common licenses with
only the identifier.
Summary of the proposal
===
Situation
=
Debian Policy 12.5 "Copyright inform
control: tag -1 +moreinfo
Hello Markus,
On Sat, Dec 16 2017, Markus Koschany wrote:
>> I am surprised to hear that this is accepted by ftp-master. Would
>> you mind pointing to an example package?
>
> ufoai-data.
Thanks.
>> ISTM that the text must explain what the '+' means to be acceptable,
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 +moreinfo
Bug #883950 [debian-policy] debian-policy: allow specifying common licenses
with only the identifier
Ignoring request to alter tags of bug #883950 to the same tags previously set
--
883950: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=883950
Hi,
Am 18.12.2017 um 23:37 schrieb Jonathan Nieder:
> Hi Markus,
>
> Markus Koschany wrote:
>> Am 16.12.2017 um 15:55 schrieb Sean Whitton:
>>> On Wed, Dec 13 2017, Markus Koschany wrote:
>
If the Policy editors cannot make a decision with regards to
debian/copyright then we should ask
Hi Markus,
Markus Koschany wrote:
> Am 16.12.2017 um 15:55 schrieb Sean Whitton:
>> On Wed, Dec 13 2017, Markus Koschany wrote:
>>> If the Policy editors cannot make a decision with regards to
>>> debian/copyright then we should ask the DPL to seek legal advice and
>>> when necessary start a GR f
Am 16.12.2017 um 15:55 schrieb Sean Whitton:
> Hello Markus,
>
> On Wed, Dec 13 2017, Markus Koschany wrote:
>
>>> This would mean that we are not explicitly stating in our d/copyright
>>> file the difference between GPL-2 and GPL-2+. To learn of the
>>> difference, a user would need to view the
Hello Markus,
On Wed, Dec 13 2017, Markus Koschany wrote:
>> This would mean that we are not explicitly stating in our d/copyright
>> file the difference between GPL-2 and GPL-2+. To learn of the
>> difference, a user would need to view the full spec of the copyright
>> format.
>
> IMO this is a
Hi,
> debian-policy: allow specifying common licenses with only the identifier
Apologies for the drive-by suggestion but the closer we change Policy and/or
DEP-5 (if at all) to align with SPDX[0], everyone wins :)
[0] https://spdx.org/
Best wishes,
--
,''`.
: :' : Chris Lamb
Hello Sean,
Am 13.12.2017 um 01:31 schrieb Sean Whitton:
> Hello Markus,
>
> On Tue, Dec 12 2017, Markus Koschany wrote:
>
>> I agree that using boiler plate like this:
>>
>> | License: GPL-2+
>> | On Debian systems the full text of the GPL-2 can be found in
>> | /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2
On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 09:29:27 PM Markus Koschany wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thanks for reporting. I also intended to make such a proposal and I had
> briefly mentioned it in bug #883966. [1]
>
> The reason why the short form is allowed is because of Debian Policy 12.5
>
> "Packages distributed un
Hello Markus,
On Tue, Dec 12 2017, Markus Koschany wrote:
> I agree that using boiler plate like this:
>
> | License: GPL-2+
> | On Debian systems the full text of the GPL-2 can be found in
> | /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2
>
> is still redundant.
>
> I suggest to change Debian Policy 12.5 and
Hi,
thanks for reporting. I also intended to make such a proposal and I had
briefly mentioned it in bug #883966. [1]
The reason why the short form is allowed is because of Debian Policy 12.5
"Packages distributed under the Apache license (version 2.0), the
Artistic license, the GNU GPL (versions
control: tag -1 +moreinfo
Hello,
On Sun, Dec 10 2017, Simon McVittie wrote:
> This is not really Policy's decision: it's the ftp team (cc'd) who
> decide what they are willing to accept into Debian, and they require
> the license grant[1] to be reproduced[2]. As far as I'm aware, it
> isn't docu
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 +moreinfo
Bug #883950 [debian-policy] debian-policy: allow specifying common licenses
with only the identifier
Added tag(s) moreinfo.
--
883950: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=883950
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.or
On Sat, 09 Dec 2017 at 19:57:26 +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> First of all, I'd like policy to stop being unclear on this matter, or
> state whether the correct form is [a brief license reference] or
> [the full license grant].
This is not really Policy's decision: it's the ftp team (cc'd) who de
Package: debian-policy
Nowadays it's common to see stand alone license paragraphs like these:
|License: GPL-2+
| On Debian systems the full text of the GPL-2 can be found in
| /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2
or
|License: GPL-2+
| This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or mo
17 matches
Mail list logo
