Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist
[X-Debbugs-Cc: ftpmas...@debian.org because I know the Policy maintainers
don't actually control what is or isn't acceptable in the archive in this
respect.]
Some packages currently have stanzas like this in their copyright files:
License: MPL-2.0
Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist
[X-Debbugs-Cc: ftpmas...@debian.org because I know the Policy maintainers
don't actually control what is or isn't acceptable in the archive in this
respect.]
Some packages currently have stanzas like this in their copyright files:
License:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 09:44:29AM +, Simon McVittie wrote:
Package: debian-policy
Severity: wishlist
[X-Debbugs-Cc: ftpmas...@debian.org because I know the Policy maintainers
don't actually control what is or isn't acceptable in the archive in this
respect.]
Some packages currently
On 06/11/14 13:02, Bill Allombert wrote:
I do not thing that policy allow it, because that break the assumption that
the copyright contains all the relevant information. olicy 2.3 below states
a verbatim copy which exclude indirections.
That's why this is wishlist. I don't think policy does
On 06/11/14 12:17, Tobias Frost wrote:
just maybe another datapoint, as recently there was a similar dicussion on
d-devel, the thread started as
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/09/msg00704.html (difference: This
was a question brought up by Markus if it is sufficient to referencfe
Hi,
Simon McVittie wrote:
Some packages currently have stanzas like this in their copyright files:
License: MPL-2.0
The complete text of the Mozilla Public License 2.0 can be found in
the `MPL-2.0' file in the same directory as this file.
It is not clear to me whether Debian
Simon McVittie wrote:
My understanding is that Markus' question in that thread was orthogonal:
is the exact license grant really required, or is the license itself
enough? (for terminology see my reply at
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/09/msg00708.html).
I would also appreciate
Le Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 09:44:29AM +, Simon McVittie a écrit :
Some packages currently have stanzas like this in their copyright files:
License: MPL-2.0
The complete text of the Mozilla Public License 2.0 can be found in
the `MPL-2.0' file in the same directory as this
Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org writes:
within our current practice, the MPL-2.0 license would need to be added
to /usr/share/common-licenses to allow quoting it from the Debian
copyright file. Last time Russ looked if the license was frequent
enough, the answer was no. But you can have a
9 matches
Mail list logo
