Bug#678607: debian-policy: "original authors" in 12.5 is unclear

On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 04:51:51PM -0700, Sean Whitton wrote: > I'm not sure why Jonathan thinks his patch is a strawman. It addresses > the main issue of this bug. I don't think the explanation of what an > upstream contact is needs to be relegated to a footnote. So I am > seeking seconds for

Bug#678607: debian-policy: "original authors" in 12.5 is unclear

Sean Whitton writes: > I'm not sure why Jonathan thinks his patch is a strawman. It addresses > the main issue of this bug. I don't think the explanation of what an > upstream contact is needs to be relegated to a footnote. So I am > seeking seconds for the following

Bug#678607: debian-policy: "original authors" in 12.5 is unclear

I would like to see this bug fixed because there can be no doubt that the 'original' in "original authors" is ambiguous. On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 07:50:41PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Here's a strawman illustrating what I think the sentence meant to say. > [...] I'm not sure why Jonathan

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 07:50:41PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Here's a strawman illustrating what I think the sentence meant to say. diff --git i/policy.sgml w/policy.sgml index 52dbb26a..adb0c1c4 100644 --- i/policy.sgml +++ w/policy.sgml @@ -9873,8 +9873,15 @@ END-INFO-DIR-ENTRY

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Bart Martens wrote: Some readers may argue that an upstream contact may not be an author if he/she maintains the upstream software only by accepting patches created by others. If so, won't that be a problem everywhere else in policy that refers to upstream authors? For example in section

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 01:50:32AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com writes: Charles Plessy wrote: My personal opinion is that it is best to focus the Debian copyright file on the goal of respecting licenses and the copyright law, and to leave to the upstream

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Bill Allombert wrote: Russ Allbery wrote: Jonathan Nieder writes: Charles Plessy wrote: My personal opinion is that it is best to focus the Debian copyright file on the goal of respecting licenses and the copyright law, and to leave to the upstream documentation the difficult task

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Russ Allbery wrote: Policy 12.5 says: In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources (if any) were obtained, and should name the original authors. The last part is not at all clear. Prior to a recent conversation on debian-mentors, I had always assumed that

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Hi Russ, For completeness, since I was involved in the initial debate, here's my opinion on this bug: I would welcome the removal of should name the original authors. I have currently no strong opinion on the other side-aspects I've read in the comments so far. Regards, Bart Martens --

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

On Sat, 23 Jun 2012, Jonathan Nieder wrote: Russ Allbery wrote: Would one list bug-gnu-ut...@gnu.org? That's the most useful contact point (and we have a copyright-format field for that), but it's not in any real sense the author. Sure it is --- it's the contact point for the people who

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Package: debian-policy Severity: normal Policy 12.5 says: In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources (if any) were obtained, and should name the original authors. The last part is not at all clear. Prior to a recent conversation on debian-mentors, I had always

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Le Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 12:39:31AM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : Policy 12.5 says: In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources (if any) were obtained, and should name the original authors. Dear all, given that 1) New packages that do not name the original

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Charles Plessy wrote: My personal opinion is that it is best to focus the Debian copyright file on the goal of respecting licenses and the copyright law, and to leave to the upstream documentation the difficult task of stating who is author and who is not. Just like naming the location from

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Le Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 03:38:05AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder a écrit : Just like naming the location from which the upstream source code was downloaded is useful, giving contact information (at least a name, mailing list, or web forum) for the upstream maintainer is useful, no? Hi, the problem

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Jonathan Nieder jrnie...@gmail.com writes: Charles Plessy wrote: My personal opinion is that it is best to focus the Debian copyright file on the goal of respecting licenses and the copyright law, and to leave to the upstream documentation the difficult task of stating who is author and who

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Charles Plessy wrote: Nevertheless, listing the original authors does not give an accurate information about who currently develops a program, and who to contact. If original means upstream of Debian (i.e., where does this code originate from?), then it gives exactly that. As you might have

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

Russ Allbery wrote: Would one list bug-gnu-ut...@gnu.org? That's the most useful contact point (and we have a copyright-format field for that), but it's not in any real sense the author. Sure it is --- it's the contact point for the people who create the code that goes into the upstream

Bug#678607: debian-policy: original authors in 12.5 is unclear

On Sat, 23 Jun 2012 00:39:31 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: Policy 12.5 says: In addition, the copyright file must say where the upstream sources (if any) were obtained, and should name the original authors. The last part is not at all clear. Prior to a recent conversation on