[ Dropping the Cc: to debian-u...@lists.debian.org - Please don't cross-post if you can avoid it! That is, please don't send the same mail to multiple mailing lists ]
刘涛 dijo [Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 10:49:34AM +0800]: > Oh my god, I'm so sorry. I originally wanted to say that every > software package in Debian will have a "copyright" document, but the > input method was mistakenly typed as copyleft. Because I found that > every package in Debian will have a "copyright" document, but not > every package has a "license.txt" document. So I want to confirm > that we users want to know the license usage of the software > package, which document should prevail. In addition, when the > license information declared in the two documents is inconsistent, > how should we deal with it, and which document shall prevail. My first answer to this question was "/usr/share/doc/PKGNAME/copyright is authoritative and should prevail", but on a second thought, I must agree with Theodore Ts'o, who rightfully said: I am not a lawyer, and even if I were a lawyer, I am not *your* lawyer, so I am not in a position to give legal advice. If you want an authoratative opinion, you will need to find a lawyer who is willing to give you formal legal advice, and they will very ask to be paid in order to give you that opinion. So... There is no one-size-fits-all answer here. But if you find a /usr/share/doc/PKGNAME/copyright document being inconsistent with a license.txt file (or with any licensing header included as part of any of the files, or whatever like that), please file it as a high-severity bug! Greetings,