On Sun, 2025-03-09 at 15:53 +0000, Peter B wrote: > On 08/03/2025 15:40, Soren Stoutner wrote: > > > > On Saturday, March 8, 2025 8:21:32 AM MST Peter B wrote: > > > > > I'm not at all sure about this. > > > > > It seems to me that the Policy wording is ambiguous, > > > > > as I would interpret "copyright information" to imply both the copyright > > > > > notice/statement and the license itself. > > > > > > Policy 22.8 is not ambiguous, which is the release that added the > > option to not include all copyright information in debian/copyright > > (previously all copyright information was required). When this change > > was made, they specifically said: > > > > > > “Note that there is no change to the requirement to copy *all > > licensing information* into /usr/share/doc/PACKAGE/copyright.” > > > > > > I do agree that without this statement in 22.8 it would be ambiguous. > > > > > > -- > > > > Soren Stoutner > > > > so...@debian.org > > > > > @Soren, > > I get your point now. It seems I was wrong in excluding autotools files > from checking in lrc. > > > @Phil, > > I'm tempted to invert the original title of your bug report. > > rather than saying > Bug#1099786: Exclude files that are part of build e.g. autotools > Seems to me, it could instead say > Bug#1099786: Do not exclude autotools files from checking. > > That would enable me to close the bug. > > > Regards, > Peter >
Hi Peter, After discussion I can understand why you would wish the change and after reading I would agree. -- Regards Phil Donate: https://buymeacoffee.com/kathenasorg -- "I play the game for the game’s own sake" Arthur Conan Doyle - The Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans -- Internet Relay Chat (IRC): kathenas Website: https://kathenas.org Instagram: https://instagram.com/kathenasorg Threads: https://www.threads.net/@kathenasorg --
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
