A number of packages have a copyright file that basically says that this software is licensed under the GPL or LGPL and that you should have got a copy of the license text "with the program"
To me this isn't the license and in such cases we should also include the license text in the copyright file (or at least include gpl.txt in the package). That's my view but I can see it may be a bone of contention. What's the consensus on this? Is the following text enough or do we need to add the license text? Amanda Example of a 'terse' copyright file: ser is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version For a license to use the ser software under conditions other than those described here, or to purchase support for this software, please contact iptel.org by e-mail at the following addresses: info at iptel.org ser is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more details. You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
