On Wed, 29 May 2019 10:36:27 +0500 Pirate Praveen <prav...@onenetbeyond.org> wrote: > justification: it should not remove any existing copyright noticed > added by maintainer.
Then what's the point of running "cme update dpkg-copyright" ? Let's see what's going on: node-gulp$ licensecheck -r make-iterator --copyright -m make-iterator/LICENSE MIT/X11 (BSD like) 2014-2018 Jon Schlinkert. make-iterator/README.md UNKNOWN 2012-2013 moutjs team and contributors (http:moutjs.com) make-iterator/index.js UNKNOWN 2014-2018 Jon Schlinkert. make-iterator/package.json UNKNOWN *No copyright* First problem: LICENSE and README.md do not contain the same copyright owners. By reading the README.md file, I saw that make-iterator is derived from moutjs. Hence debian/copyright entry is accurate. But how can cme decide if the discrepancy is due to upstream change or upstream inconsistencies ? It cannot. license-reconcile choose to throw an error in this case. cme trusts upstream files. To avoid update debian/copyright with wrong entries, you should override wrong copyright information in debian/fill.copyright.blanks.yml as described in Dpkg::Copyright::Scanner man page. Note that fill.copyright.blanks can be edited with "cme edit dpkg" That said, tests done with node-gulp has shown that the way cme extracts information from LICENSE and README file is not ideal. I'm going to improve its behaviour. All the best.
