Hi ! Le mardi 09 juin 2009 18:24:34, vous avez écrit : > Romain Beauxis <[email protected]> writes: > > Your package misses informations about the license of the files in > > src/libxineadec/gsm610/, at least. > > doesn't debian/copyright focus on the license of the contents of the > binary package instead of listing every single file in a source package? > I imagine that for large packages like firefox or openoffice, this can > become really hard to get 100% right. > > BTW, I'm not trying to say that debian/copyright should deliberatly > leave out information here. In any case, thanks for notifying us about > this!
To my knowledge, all files should be checked for license considerations. In particular, if a file with an incompatible license is found in the tarball but not necessary for the binary package, it is removed from the .orig tarball, and usually the version is renamed with a "dfsg" string at some place. I know this is hard work for big packages, so I won't blame anyone for missing a license notice, I also did it in the past, and surely will again. However, when I encountered this file, I noticed it was present in a lot of other packages, so I filled a bug to notify them too. I do not think this is a RC bug since the license in this case conforms to the DFSG, so I filled them as "important". Romain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
