Bug#779676: dep5-copyright-license-name-not-unique check is too strict or too severe.

[Javi Merino]

On Sun, 7 Jun 2015 17:30:02 -0500 "Steve M. Robbins" <st...@sumost.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 07:13:12AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> 
> > I think that the dep5-copyright-license-name-not-unique tag should either:
> > 
> >  - reduce its severity, as just an advice for readability, or
> >  - only be issued when the same short name is used with a different 
> > description.
> 
> Have to agree with Charles.  I got the warning on the attached
> copyright file that uses the suggested "GPL-2+" twice and *with the
> same description*.

I fully agree.  This check fails for the examples in [0] so it should
be removed or fixed.  The offending code is in
checks/source-copyright.pm, lines 391-405:

                for (@short_licenses) {
                    $short_licenses_seen{$_} = $i;
                    if (not defined($full_license)) {
                        $required_standalone_licenses{$_} = $i;
                    } else {
                        if(defined($full_licenses_seen{$_})
                            and $_ ne 'public-domain') {
                            tag 'dep5-copyright-license-name-not-unique',
                              "license: $_, (paragraph at line $current_line)";
                        } else {
                            $full_licenses_seen{$_} = $current_line;
                            print("license, seen = $_\n");
                        }
                    }
                }

This adds the license to $full_licenses_seen when there is an entry
with a License: and then fails if there is another entry with the same
License.  That's perfectly valid, as the examples show.

[0] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/

Cheers,
Javi

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature