> > 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