Am 28.06.22 um 20:05 schrieb Andreas Metzler:
I disagree that this is as clear cut as you make it sound, policy does
not require DEP-5 or similar per file level listings. The aggregated
work is licensed GPL-3+, there is no legal or policy need to list the
license of the individual files in the binary package. And we are
listing the copyright holder (FSF).
I did not claim that Policy requires DEP-5 or a per-file listing.
Policy 2.3:
"Every package must be accompanied by a verbatim copy of its distribution
license(s) in the file /usr/share/doc/PACKAGE/copyright.
The copyright information for files in a package must be copied verbatim
into /usr/share/doc/PACKAGE/copyright, when all of the following hold:
1. the distribution license for those files requires that copyright
information be included in all copies and/or binary distributions;
2. the files are shipped in the binary package, either in source or
compiled form; and
3. the form in which the files are present in the binary package does
not include a plain text version of their copyright notices.
..."
I think that is quite clear cut. Even if the two files are not included
in the build at least their distribution licenses have to be included.
If they are included in the build (binary pkg) also the copyright info
has to be included. GPL does not just "overwrite" the other licenses in
a magical way.
Actually, I have done the work not to fight for it so you can just copy
one file...
