Re: debian/copyright in source package

[ Dropping CC for Simon and Russ because I know for sure they are in -policy ]. On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 06:23:52PM +0200, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: > But what shall be the source for this generation? I was basically doing "cat debian/copyright.in LICENSE" Not anything AI-style, and not trying t

Re: Bug#795783: Applications should not use socket below $HOME by default

2015-08-16 21:33:37 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt: > Package: debian-policy > > User-level applications should not use sockets below $HOME by default: the > filesystem used for $HOME might not support them, as is the case for NFS > or OpenAFS. [...] I don't know about OpenAFS, but sockets are supported

Bug#795783: Applications should not use socket below $HOME by default

Package: debian-policy User-level applications should not use sockets below $HOME by default: the filesystem used for $HOME might not support them, as is the case for NFS or OpenAFS. They should use XDG_RUNTIME_DIR (if set) or as a fallback a temporary directory below /tmp; any location below $HO

Bug#795402: base-files: Please add Creative Commons license texts

On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 at 18:41:08 +0100, Tony Houghton wrote: > The Creative Commons licenses are quite popular for non-code files and > at least some of them are acknowledged to be DFSG-compatible since 3.0. > only explicitly lists CC-BY-SA, > but I believe at

Re: debian/copyright in source package

Thorsten Alteholz writes: > But what shall be the source for this generation? > The copyright information that are created by upstream are most of the > time not really up to date. The maintainer can add overrides or patch the upstream files to make them more accurate in this case, no? > Yes,

Re: debian/copyright in source package

On 16/08/15 17:23, Thorsten Alteholz wrote: > On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Santiago Vila wrote: >> To allow for the file to be automatically generated at build time, >> which in turn avoids useless duplication of license text in the source >> package. > > But what shall be the source for this generation?

Re: debian/copyright in source package

On Sun, 16 Aug 2015, Santiago Vila wrote: 2. Why would policy say "should" instead of "must", if we then do not allow for exceptions? (packages generating copyright file at build time). This is not my area, but why should there be an exception? To allow for the file to be automatically gen

Re: debian/copyright in source package

> >2. Why would policy say "should" instead of "must", if we then do not > >allow for exceptions? (packages generating copyright file at build time). > > This is not my area, but why should there be an exception? To allow for the file to be automatically generated at build time, which in turn avo