Ben Finney <[email protected]> writes: > Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes:
>> Speaking of which, the other requirement we have is: >> 8) Provide information about the upstream maintainer and upstream >> location of the software for non-native software, including any >> necessary repackaging of upstream source for Debian's purposes. > Does that information necessarily belong in ‘debian/copyright’? I > thought the proposed ‘debian/README.source’ was more suited for this. I've had that conversation I think five separate times now and each time seem to have convinced people, which is why debian/copyright is what's recommended in devref and similar sources (see devref 6.7.8.2). I can have the conversation again if you haven't seen the previous rounds, but I'd rather not if you're willing to either take my word for it or research the previous conversations. (Apologies if this sounds snarky; I'm not upset at you. I'm just kind of tired of repeating myself. :/) -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
