Dear Ximin, the patch you proposed moves a lot of text without changing it, which makes it difficult to review. Moreover, I think that there is a long-standing consensus to not change the normative parts of this format unless unavoidable.
I have refrained from commenting until you pinged the bug, because I know that it is faster to write negative comments, and I wanted to give a chance to others to write supportive comments first. However, no feedback came. For me it underlines that the patch you sent is not creating consensus or enthousiasm. Every Debian developers have write access to the DEP Subversion repository, but the purpose is to let all DDs create new DEPs. For modifications of the drafts there needs consensus. At the current point, I strongly object to changes that will invalidate existing Debian copyright files, and I strongly suggest to stop perfecting the document unless there is a general agreement that some parts are too difficult to understand. Seeing many people doing the same mistake is usually a good metric for this. In our case, while it can be debated what is optimal to put or not put in stand-alone license files, the Debian copyright files following the current version of the specification already fit well their purpose. Let's defer further complifications – or simplifications – to future releases. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
