On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 04:32:08PM +0100, Chris Lamb wrote: > Hi Julian, > > > The test for the human-readable rather than legal text of the Creative > > Commons licenses seems to fail, because the preamble about Creative > > Commons not being a law firm is not part of the license text, and > > neither is the postamble about Creative Commons not being a party to > > the license agreement; they are instead form the terms and conditions > > between Creative Commons and the person using a CC license. So I > > cannot see why these parts should necessarily be included in the > > Debian copyright file. Has there been a policy decision to require > > this, perhaps? > > > > Also, it seems that this check would be better in the parse_license > > function when checking each license block rather than the run > > function, as there might be more than one CC license in a copyright > > file, and it is feasible that one is correct and one not. > > CC'ing Jonathan Dowland who filed the original request for this > in #903470. Could you folks come to some agreement on a good/reliable > check?
Hi Chris and Jonathan, How about the following? In the parse_license function, where each license paragraph is parsed, something like the following: if ($full_license and $short_license =~ m/cc-/) { if ($full_license !~ /definitions/i) { tag 'incomplete-creative-commons-license'; } } All of the full legal texts contain "Section 1. Definitions", whereas the human-readable summaries don't. This also means that you are not searching the entire copyright file, but rather just the paragraph with the full Creative Commons text. Best wishes, Julian