On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 05:27:55PM +0200, Axel Beckert wrote: > Hi, > > Santiago Vila wrote: > > I'll try to document this in the next version, but not in the README > > as it has been suggested. This deserves a place in the copyright file > > itself, below the line saying "The GNU Public Licenses [...]". > > I must admit, I haven't looked in the debian/copyright file, but I > think someone on IRC had that idea, too. > > Another thing which I think would solve this issue easily, but which > may have some side effects I'm not yet aware of, would be to rename > the file to "Artistic-1.0-Perl" (or whatever) and make "Artistic" a > symlink to it, analogous how it's done for the different GPL versions.
That would be a possibility to which I'm not opposed in principle, but for now I'm just going to clarify what we currently have without doing any major changes. This is really a more complex problem and it should ideally be solved by the policy group, as they are who really decide about the contents of common-licenses (there is a question in the base-files FAQ about this). Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
