From a Debian packaging perspective, as long as you maintain the copyright notices that upstream provides in debian/copyright, you've done what needs doing.
It may not be worth the trouble to dig into it more. Your call. Scott K On February 5, 2019 3:46:57 AM UTC, Nicholas D Steeves <[email protected]> wrote: >Dear Scott, Chris, and DPMT, > >On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 01:44:47PM +0000, Scott Kitterman wrote: >> You are correct to include the copyright notice and license from src/ >> css_parser/version.py in your debian/copyright. It does, however, >seem >> unlikley there there is anything actually copyrightable in that file. > You >> might want to take that up with upstream. >> > >Thank you for reviewing and accepting python-css-parser. I agree, >version.py does not seem to meet the minimum standard for >originality. Do you mean I should ask upstream to drop their >copyright header for that file, or something else? > >Examining the upstream git project (rather than the release tarballs >from PyPI) reveals many commits from Kovid Goyal and Francesco >Martini, plus COPYING (GPL-3+), COPYING.LESSER (LGPL-3+), and >CSSUTILS_README.txt. > >If you'd like I could extend the Comment sections, saying something >about git committers, and elaborating on the "Author: Various People" >and "Author-email: [email protected]" that upstream moved to in >this commit: >https://github.com/ebook-utils/css-parser/commit/555805e58889bb0818b6684f5092612600288d7c > >Alternatively, would you like to me ask upstream to document their >copyright holders? ;-) > >Sincerely, >Nicholas _______________________________________________ Python-modules-team mailing list [email protected] https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/python-modules-team
