On Mon, Feb 08, 2010 at 10:43:54AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > That it's not called a policy doesn't stop it from being one. See > <URL:http://ftp-master.debian.org/REJECT-FAQ.html>, which in regard to > this current discussion links to a 2006 message from an FTP Master:
It links to a 2006 message from an ftp *assistant* who is now an ftp master. Lack of dissent at the time is merely an indication that it was a non-binding statement from a single member of the ftp team, not that the Project agreed with it (or that the ftp team has the authority to unilaterally impose new archive acceptance requirements). > Your debian/copyright file must contain the following information: > > - The author(s) name This, in particular, diverges from the requirements of Debian Policy, the major free software licenses, and copyright law. Author != Copyright holder. > As you noted, that is an aspect of expressed FTP Master policy that is > in contradiction to the current practice of the Debian project. The > question I'm raising is which should we describe in the Debian policy > document: current consensus practice, or FTP Master edict? Assuming by "current consensus practice" you mean the copyright files that fail to satisfy the GPL requirements to reproduce copyright statements, then: neither. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
