Willi Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > For the next upload, I'd like to get this right. Can anybody tell me > what I should do to get this right, at least to meet our standards > for copyright files? What should I suggest to upstream to fix the > License file? Just saying: "Add all copyright holders to the list" > won't work in this case.
Nevertheless, that is the ideal to work toward. By examining the copyright status, you've merely discovered a problem that the package has had (for a long time, by your description). Fixing that problem is not easy, but it's much easier to fix now than before it's recognised. The default suggestion would be for you (or people you can trust to do the work) to contact those further upstream who could tell you about the copyright status of each part of the work; repeat until done, continue in perpetuity. This is a lot of work, but it's the madness that "default copyright even if the author never claims it and is never identified" lumps us with. -- \ "Saying that Java is nice because it works on all OSes is like | `\ saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders" | _o__) -- http://bash.org/ | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
