Bug#955005: Relax requirements to copy copyright notices into d/copyright

2020-04-01 Thread Sam Hartman
No, I missed this.
We're on the same page.



Bug#955005: Relax requirements to copy copyright notices into d/copyright

2020-04-01 Thread Sean Whitton
Hello Sam,

On Wed 01 Apr 2020 at 05:11AM -04, Sam Hartman wrote:

> I think there is another use of debian/copyright beyond just documenting
> what ends up in the binaries.
> I think that if I read debian/copyright in a source package, I should
> expect to understand the licenses I need to comply with when dealing
> with the source package.
>
> So for example  if the package requires GPL-3 code during its build, and
> by policy I don't want to deal with GPL-3 I should know I have a problem
> only from reading debian/copyright.
>
>
> So I think you need to talk about more than just binaries.

As I mentioned in my e-mail opening the bug, I do not believe that my
proposal changes anything at all about the requirements to document
licenses in d/copyright, only copyright notices.

Please take another look and let me know if my patch somehow changes the
requirements to document licenses in a way I did not intend.

-- 
Sean Whitton


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Bug#954794: New packages must not declare themselves Essential

2020-04-01 Thread Sam Hartman
> "Bill" == Bill Allombert  writes:

Bill> But is it an actual problem ?  Do we see packages marked
Bill> Essential: yes by mistake ?

I think Josh's analysis brought up some important points for me that I
did not consider before and that need to be considered making decisions
in the future.
I think capturing that analysis in a pointer from policy or in policy is
important to me.

Bill> Each time we make policy longer we dilute the content.


Obviously, in the limit this is true.
I think that capturing rationale for things that have good rationale and
that could affect the project if not properly considered is worth doing
even though it makes policy longer.



Bug#954794: New packages must not declare themselves Essential

2020-04-01 Thread Bill Allombert
On Wed, Apr 01, 2020 at 05:14:13AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
> I concur with the comments raised so far.
> 
> I think it would be great to do a better job of outlining the problems
> with essential packages in debian-policy.
...
> I would support a statement in policy that as of the time of writing we
> do not anticipate ever creating a new essential package.  That would
> help people considering proposing making an essential package know they
> are probably looking at things the wrong way.

But is it an actual problem ?
Do we see packages marked Essential: yes by mistake ?

Each time we make policy longer we dilute the content.

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. 

Imagine a large red swirl here. 



Bug#954794: New packages must not declare themselves Essential

2020-04-01 Thread Sam Hartman
I concur with the comments raised so far.

I think it would be great to do a better job of outlining the problems
with essential packages in debian-policy.
I don't understand why we would tie our hands though.
A consensus of debian-devel seems adequate to consider those issues and
evaluate them.
If after making that consideration we decide to create a new essential
package, we're going to do that policy not withstanding.

I would support a statement in policy that as of the time of writing we
do not anticipate ever creating a new essential package.  That would
help people considering proposing making an essential package know they
are probably looking at things the wrong way.

--Sam



Bug#955005: Relax requirements to copy copyright notices into d/copyright

2020-04-01 Thread Sam Hartman
I think there is another use of debian/copyright beyond just documenting
what ends up in the binaries.
I think that if I read debian/copyright in a source package, I should
expect to understand the licenses I need to comply with when dealing
with the source package.

So for example  if the package requires GPL-3 code during its build, and
by policy I don't want to deal with GPL-3 I should know I have a problem
only from reading debian/copyright.


So I think you need to talk about more than just binaries.

--Sam