Santiago Vila [29/May 4:06pm +02] wrote: > Hi. > > After a discussion has taken place, I've decided to add the nine > licenses proposed by Mechtilde to base-files. > > Including a license in base-files should be considered as a promise > that the licenses will be there indefinitely (i.e. forever in principle, > unless there is a very strong reason not to, but I can't imagine right now > what kind of reason that could be). > > I understand that packages under those licenses now "may" refer to the > copies in base-files in an opt-in way, as it's an essential package. > > Naturally, I expect this to become a "should" in policy as well in > some not too distant future, but there is not any hurry on my side. > > In fact, I think it would be a good thing if there was some kind of > intermediate period during which maintainers receive some warning or > advance notice in a less intrusive way than a bug report (for example, > by way of a lintian warning).
Thanks. We can document this in Policy if someone would provide an updated patch. It shouldn't be a 'should' yet, indeed. -- Sean Whitton
