~ Stephan Lachnit [2022-01-26 15:20 +0100]: >> But already now, a DEP-5 file could be provided to REUSE. One would have >> to check whether the ones Debian provides would work in the default >> location for DEP-5 files in REUSE (`.reuse/dep5`). If not, I suspect >> there would be no large changes needed. > > Probably too technical at this stage, but a conversion tool in > combination with the yaml format could actually be quite useful. > E.g. one could have a debian/REUSE.yaml sub-file for the copyright > information of the package build files and a debian/REUSE-source.yaml > file in case the source does not follow the REUSE spec. If the > reuse-tool would have an option to specify a different file for the > root REUSE.yaml, we could actually use it for all packages with > relatively low migration work on the maintainer side.
Perhaps it's really too early, but hey. The current idea for REUSE.yaml is that, other than the DEP-5 implementation, you can have multiple of these files in your project. Each file can describe files relative to it, but not in parent directories. Consider you have a sub-directory with binary files you'd like to mark, e.g. icons you also re-use in other projects. You could create a REUSE.yaml file in the same directory describing them. Whenever you copy the directory in another project, the licensing/copyright info is retained. This is the reason why it should not describe parent directories. Therefore, such a file in /debian could only cover files in this directory. But I understand that in this special scenario it would be useful. I could think of ways how either Debian or REUSE introduce some hacks around it, but before we elaborate on this I think there are other more fundamental decisions Debian would have to make first ;) Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join