Le Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:16:46AM -0700, Russ Allbery a écrit : > > I think, and I believe the ftpmasters would agree, that they will > enforce project consensus provided that it doesn't strike them as > legally dangerous or otherwise seriously problematic. I would rather > have a consensus than a dictated policy. More people involved means > more insight into the challenges of different types of packages. As > we've already seen with previous iterations of this discussion, it's too > easy to draw conclusions based on the vast majority of tiny packages and > create situations that are untenable for the small number of huge > packages we have.
Hi Russ, I would say that on the other hand, in the absence of clear guidelines, people can be tempted to over-do the work in debian/copyright to “play safe” their upload to the NEW queue. After dozens of uploads, I have not finished to reverse-engeneer the thoughts of the our archive's managers. For instance, one of my first packages had in its source some headers where Upstream forgot LGPL statements in an otherwise GPL context. Despite that it is anyway allowed to turn LGPL into GPL, the package was not allowed in Debian until the presence of LGPL statements was properly documented in debian/copyright. Now I see in our archive xsettings-kde: it is derived from a BSDish program, xsettings, and was GPLed by dropping a copy of the GPL license in the source. The package was accepted without mentionning the BSDish license. I am all for simpler debian/copyright files, but why was I required to do more work than the maintainer of xsettings-kde? http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/x/xsettings-kde/xsettings-kde_0.9-1/xsettings-kde.copyright http://svn.mandriva.com/svn/soft/theme/xsettings-kde/trunk/ I really think that we need some clear guidelines, that of course are friendly to large packages. For instance, it was unclear in the DEP5 discussion if we only need to list the license, or if we have to indicate which files they were found in (as it is done in the example provided on the latest published guildeline, see the URL below). Can we have an answer about this? http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg00023.html Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org