Perfect - thanks for the clarifications. Cheers, Andrew.
On Sat, 2026-02-28 at 11:20 +0100, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Quoting [email protected] (2026-02-28 10:31:14) > > The Debian NEW review of rust-io-timer 0.0.1+ds-1 has been > > completed. > > > > Decision: ACCEPTED > > Reviewer: Andrew McMillan > > > > Review comment: > > > > Lintian has a couple of warnings about your debian/copyroght file, > > but I read them twice and I can't figure out what's triggering it. > > It all looks fine to me... > > I believe all those three Lintian warnings to be false. > > > rust-io-timer source: missing-debian-watch-file-standard > > [debian/watch] > > It is not mandatory for a package to have a watch file, and Lintian > evidently is unaware that recent versions of uscan supports using > debian/upstream/ as source of truth when debian/watch is omitted. > > > License is in Reference field (see bug#786450) > > rust-io-timer source: missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright > > gpl-3+ [debian/copyright:31] > > > rust-io-timer source: missing-license-text-in-dep5-copyright GPL-3+ > > [debian/copyright:74] > > These are already overridden (hence the reference to a bugreport). > > The issue is interpretation of "Stanza" (a.k.a. paragraph) vs. field > in > https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#stand-alone-license-stanza > > The License stanza "can be used to provide the full license text". > Lintian requires the license field in the stand-alone license stanza > to > be a multi-line field, where I provide the information using a > single-line license field and a Reference field. > > - Jonas -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Porirua, New Zealand +64 (27) 288 6741 Do nothing unless you must, and when you must act: hesitate. ----------------------------------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
