Lars Wirzenius <[email protected]> writes: > The current outstanding issues I am aware of:
> * a "Comment" field would be good > * license shortnames/keywords: the set of keywords probably needs work, > and hopefully can be compatible with what other projects use; the > current thread on the meaning of "public domain" is part of this > * file globbing syntax > * clarify the text so it's clear DEP-5 won't require more precision > than is currently needed > If there's more issues, please raise them. I will be be starting > separate threads on the above topics later (in other words, please > don't discuss these topics in this thread, only the meta stuff). I'll start a new thread for a few (relatively minor) things that I talked to Steve about during DebConf10. I wanted to mention here, though, that one of my goals is for DEP-5 to not be Debian-specific. As an upstream maintainer, I would like to use DEP-5 for the upstream LICENSE file for the software that I maintain, both because I think the benefits of machine-readability are important beyond just Debian and because it will save me substantial work as a Debian package maintainer since I can just reuse the upstream LICENSE file with some programmatic modifications as the Debian copyright file. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
