On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 07:38:47PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 03:03:32AM -0700, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> > The Copyright field should only ever be used to list copyrights. To use it > > for any other purpose would be gratuitously confusing. So no, it does not > > serve the purpose of identifying an upstream contact/maintainer. > In my understading, the policy above asks for: > > - the name the upstream original authors; > - the name of the first Debian maintainers. > It does not ask to single out among the original authors who is maintainer > and who is not. One can be author but not maintainer. > By listing all copyright holders, including the debian directory, we list all > authors and debian maintainers, that is what I wrote above. > However, it is not always true: when the copyright holder is not a physical > person, or when the work is in the public domain, the autors are not listed. > But singling out a couple of the currently most active ones as ‘maintainers’ > does not fullfil the Policy's requirement either. > I think that the Policy should be fixed: This is the wrong forum for that discussion. If you want Policy to change, please discuss this on debian-policy. Until Policy is changed, DEP-5 should continue to accomodate its existing requirements. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ [email protected] [email protected] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
