Le Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 03:55:46PM +0200, Martin Erik Werner a écrit :
In newer versions of lintian, this warning has changed, so the
following file:
###
Format:
http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Upstream-Name: td
Source: http://example.com
License: dog
On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 10:12:06 -0400 =?UTF-8?Q?David_Pr=c3=a9vot?=
taf...@debian.org wrote:
I assumed what lintian is actually pointing is the missing “Files:
*â€
paragraph (instead of inaccurately using the header paragraph to
document the main license), or any variant of it (e.g.,
Hi,
[ Charles, please keep some relevant context when replying to a bug
report, “bts -m show ##” can help. ]
Le 18/04/2015 02:25, Charles Plessy a écrit :
regarding the tag missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright, I think, like
Martin, that it should not be triggered by multi-line
Hi David, Martin, and everybody,
regarding the tag missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright, I think, like
Martin, that it should not be triggered by multi-line License fields in the
header paragraph.
The specification states: If there are no remaining lines, then all of the
short names or
I'm seeing this same warning without the back-reference to header, for
example this copyright file:
###
Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Upstream-Name: td
Source: http://example.com
License: dog
This is dog license
Files: debian/*
Copyright: someone
Hi,
Le 03/04/2015 19:25, Martin Erik Werner a écrit :
I'm seeing this same warning without the back-reference to header, for
example this copyright file:
###
Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Upstream-Name: td
Source: http://example.com
License:
6 matches
Mail list logo
