On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 08:28:18AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: > Package: developers-reference > Version: 3.4.3 > > I have a slight, but not overwhelming, preference for having this in > README.source rather than in debian/copyright; however, I think the more > important issue here by far is that policy and the devref currently > recommend including the same information in two different places, and this > duplication is bad and inevitably leads to *both* locations being unreliable > sources for this information. Moving this to a bug on the devref (per my > personal preference); if consensus is that debian/copyright is the right > place for this, then we can reassign it to policy, but one way or the other > one of these documents should be changed to agree with the other.
I would like to say that I agree with you, and that I too prefer README.source over debian/copyright, for various reason including that source repackaging shoule have no effect on the copyright status of the binary package, so it is quite sufficient to be documented in the source package only. Cheers, -- Bill. <ballo...@debian.org> Imagine a large red swirl here.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
