On 2014-09-20 16:22, Markus Koschany wrote: > On 20.09.2014 16:02, Tobias Frost wrote: >> Addendum: >> >> On Sat, 2014-09-20 at 15:45 +0200, Tobias Frost wrote: >>>> Absolutely agreed. But can you point me to examples where the short >>>> reference to /usr/share/common-licenses was deemed not appropriate by >>>> the FTP team? >> >> >> From >> https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg00023.html >> (the FTP master provides that link in their REJECT-FAQ, >> https://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html, under "Copyright") >> Its from 2006, but still valid) >> >>> - Its not enough to have the following two-liner: >>> | On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License >>> | can be found in the `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL' file. >>> >>> There are license headers, like the one used for GPL in the example >>> below, you >>> should use those. >> > > I think that contradicts the information from Debian's Policy and the > copyright format 1.0 manual and needs further clarification from the FTP > team. There are many packages that use copyright format 1.0 and the same > License paragraphs in the same way as I do and I am not aware that > anybody rejected packages because of that.
Since you are referring to the MRCF 1.0, I think there is a misunderstanding here. Look at the GPL examples at the bottom that specification. All Tobias is asking you to do is to prefix your two-liner with the standard 3-paragraph boilerplate, for a total of 4 paragraphs. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: https://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
