On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 02:32:55PM +0100, Bill Allombert wrote: > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 01:43:08PM +0100, Javier Serrano Polo wrote: > > Package: debian-policy > > Version: 4.1.3.0 > > Severity: wishlist > > X-Debbugs-CC: a...@debian.org, ballo...@debian.org, > > spwhit...@spwhitton.name, r...@debian.org > > > > Copyright information, like changelogs and manuals, is not technically > > required by software. > > > > I propose this enhancement to section 12.5: > > > > Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its > > copyright information and distribution license in the > > file /usr/share/doc/package/copyright > > or /usr/share/doc/source-copyright/copyright; the latter may not > > be installed. [...] > > > > [...] and the first package Depends on the second. > > Alternatively, /usr/share/doc/package may not exist if the > > package Recommends source-copyright, which comes from the same > > source. [...] > > Let it be clear: this alternative is to ship an optional, extra arch-all > package named <source package-name>-copyright that includes the copyright > files and only the copyright files ? > > For what it is worth, I never liked the idea of publishing .deb files > that did not include the copyright file. > However your proposal has the benefit of avoiding spurious circular > dependencies caused by the symlink option.
... However <package> will have to have a versioned Depends: on <source package>-copyright for exactly the same reason: the copyright file might change between versions and we do not want to confuse users by allowing them to have an outdated <source package>-copyright package. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here.