On 28/08/14 19:28, Daniel Pocock wrote: > If an upstream publishes a license (or link to GPL) and copyright on > their web site but not in their tarball, how do people feel about that? > > Should it just be noted in a comment in debian/copyright?
Copying emails/etc. into debian/copyright is considered to be sufficient to document clarification/relicensing, so copying a license declaration from the upstream website into debian/copyright seems like it ought to be sufficient here - it's effectively the upstream relicensing from the implied null license ("copyright owned by someone, all rights reserved") to an actual license. > Or should the packager create a repackaged upstream tarball with a copy > of the web site text combined with the contents of the original source > tarball? I very much hope that's considered to be a waste of time. If you're going to spend time on this, spend it on asking upstream to make the license explicit in their future releases. S -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53ff7e79.7030...@debian.org