On 07/29/2011 07:20 PM, Allison Randal wrote: > On 07/28/2011 08:40 PM, Matt Zimmerman wrote: >> I seem to have missed Allison's email notifying us of this, but it looks >> like this document has been merged with the ARB one, and also made >> appropriately relative to the Ubuntu policy manual. This is great! >> >> I read over it today, and have a few comments: >> >> - 4.5 Copyright - this seems to be saying that debian/copyright is not >> required if a distribution agreement is signed. Why is that? I think >> it's useful and appropriate to still have debian/copyright, particularly >> where some free software is included in the package. > > This may a wording problem with "waived". I read that as meaning the > copyright file won't need the same level of tiny detail we would use to > verify that the package can be released under an entirely free license > with no encumbrances. For example, the company won't need to do a code > scan, or identify every file that was developed by a contractor vs > employee vs affiliated entity. The copyright notices they would > ordinarily give to their users are sufficient. > > Here's a suggestion for rewording. Nick, does that match your process?
Yes, that matches. > ------ > * 2.3 Copyright Considerations: The debian/copyright file is where > Debian packages store information about the copyright and license of a > package. A distribution agreement transfers the responsibility of > copyright management to the partner, so we won't perform independent > verification of the contents of this file for partners. For the benefit > of the users, you should include copies of the software's standard > copyright statements and licensing terms in debian/copyright. It's also > helpful to provide information on any free software included in the package. > > * 4.5 Copyright: debian/copyright: see notes on 2.3. > > * 12.5 Copyright information: see notes on 2.3. > ------ > >> - In a couple of places, the language "the maintainer will choose how he >> will..." is used (or similar). Please use gender neutral language >> instead (I suggest "how they will"). > > Switched to "they". > > > I also changed "copyright assignment" to "copyright management", should > be closer to what was actually intended. Looks good :) Thanks a lot, Nick
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- technical-board mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
