Alex <[email protected]> writes: >> I would just use a File: * stanza with the general package license and >> let it cover such files and not give it a second thought. It is not >> worth your time and energy, or the time and energy of someone reading >> debian/copyright, to worry about whether those files are copyrightable >> or not.
> This might be an artifact of spdx2debian not (always or by default or > never; would have to investigate) generating a catch-all Files: * > stanza. Ah, yes, okay. I think this is just a bad idea and would probably not use a tool that did that. Not because it's technically incorrect, but because I think it's a poor way to communicate the license and the primary audience for license information is humans. And, also, because I think it inaccurately represents upstream's intentions in many cases. The vast, vast majority of free software packages are released under a catch-all license with (possibly) some exceptions. This is the upstream intent, usually pretty clearly documented by upstream using other metadata (the license key in pyproject.toml, for instance, or the equivalent in Perl Makefile.PL). One point of Files: * is to echo upstream's licensing so that we're communicating the same license that upstream is stating. Another point is to avoid irritatingly exhaustive lists of files that don't themselves convey meaningful information. I think avoiding Files: * runs the risk of prioritizing rigor and precision about something that is not, in reality, rigorous and precise over clear communication, and prioritizing machine readability over human readability. If I were maintaining the tool, which obviously I'm not, I'd add a flag to specify the upstream catch-all license, generate a Files: * block stating that license, and then only list the files that are exceptions to the overall license. I suspect the DFSG review team would also thank you for that. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
