On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 13:13:23 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:

> Any further discussion?  

Sounds logcial to me.

> I'm also looking for seconds for the Policy patch
> below:
> 
> diff --git a/policy.sgml b/policy.sgml
> index 87b9795..02d6f8d 100644
> --- a/policy.sgml
> +++ b/policy.sgml
> @@ -9227,14 +9227,13 @@ END-INFO-DIR-ENTRY
>       </p>
>  
>       <p>
> -       Packages distributed under the UCB BSD license, the Apache
> -       license (version 2.0), the Artistic license, the GNU GPL
> -       (version 2 or 3), the GNU LGPL (versions 2, 2.1, or 3), and the
> -       GNU FDL (versions 1.2 or 1.3) should refer to the corresponding
> -       files under <file>/usr/share/common-licenses</file>,<footnote>
> +       Packages distributed under the Apache license (version 2.0), the
> +       Artistic license, the GNU GPL (version 2 or 3), the GNU LGPL
> +       (versions 2, 2.1, or 3), and the GNU FDL (versions 1.2 or 1.3)
> +       should refer to the corresponding files
> +       under <file>/usr/share/common-licenses</file>,<footnote>
>           <p>
>             In particular,
> -              <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/BSD</file>,
>                <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/Apache-2.0</file>,
>                <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/Artistic</file>,
>                <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2</file>,
> @@ -9244,7 +9243,14 @@ END-INFO-DIR-ENTRY
>                <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/LGPL-3</file>,
>                <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/GFDL-1.2</file>, and
>                <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/GFDL-1.3</file>
> -              respectively.
> +           respectively.  The University of California BSD license is
> +           also included in <package>base-files</package> as
> +           <file>/usr/share/common-licenses/BSD</file>, but given the
> +           brevity of this license, its specificity to code whose
> +           copyright is held by the Regents of the Univesrity of
> +           California, and the frequency of minor wording changes, its
> +           text should be included in the copyright file rather than
> +           referencing this file.
>              </p>
>            </footnote> rather than quoting them in the copyright
>         file. 

Seconded.

Cheers,
gregor
 
-- 
 .''`.   http://info.comodo.priv.at/ -- GPG key IDs: 0x8649AA06, 0x00F3CFE4
 : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux user, admin, & developer - http://www.debian.org/
 `. `'   Member of VIBE!AT & SPI, fellow of Free Software Foundation Europe
   `-    NP: Queen: You Don't Fool Me

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to