> > Where it is used is not material here
> There is a difference which missed to articulate in previous replies. If
> it is an optional component like only used for tests, we can just get
> rid of it without affecting the functionality.


Pirate, please read over the following extremely carefully before replying
as I would like to avoid either of us becoming frustrated by these repeated
failures at conversation.

The situation, as I understand it, is as follows:

a) You uploaded 6.25.0+dfsg-13 with a debian/copyright including the

   11 Files: packages/babel-preset-es2015/test/fixtures/traceur/*
   12 Copyright: [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]
   13 License: Apache-2.0
   14 Comment: name of copyright holder is missing

b) This "[yyyy] [name of copyright owner]" placeholder text comes
   from the LICENSE file.

c) The portion of the LICENSE file where it comes from is part of
   the usual "How to apply this license to your own code." This is
   what was meant by "meta statement" in my original REJECT.

d) The statement in debian/copyright therefore has no meaning
   whatsover, likely just a false positive from whatever tool you
   are using to generate such files.

e) (It is therefore totally irrelevant to this disuss whether the
   tests are used, whether the package is "useful", whether its
   packages in NEW or contrib depend on it, etc. You seem fixated
   on this point.)


     : :'  :     Chris Lamb
     `. `'`      la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk

Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list

Reply via email to