Hi! On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 03:31:00PM +0500, Lev Lamberov wrote: > Пн 23 июл 2018 @ 16:52 Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name>: > > > Found what I had in mind, in the REJECT-FAQ: > > > > "If the upstream tarball does not include a copy of the license, > > debian/copyright must document when and how the license information was > > obtained (i.e. include "Downloaded by John Doe on 2008-12-24 from > > http://example.net/license"; or reproduce email correspondence including > > some header) in addition to reproducing the license itself. In the past > > there were uploads where one couldn't find the license statement in the > > tarball or on the website from upstream, which is bad." > > Thank you, Sean!
Yes, thank you :-) > Still I find it ambiguous. It worth to note that this particular point > was revised last time in Dec 2008. Then, in the first sentence it > mentions "a copy of the license", but the second sentece talks about a > "license statement". In emacs-php's apache-mode we have only the second. > > Nevertheless,the most interesting thing about emacs-php's apache-mode is > that its license statement says: > > > You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along > > with your copy of Emacs; see the file COPYING. I agree that's interesting, because apache-mode is GPL-2+ and Emacs is distributing a copy of GPL-3+. Thankfully Usami Kenta resolved the issue. It's ready to sponsor from here: g...@salsa.debian.org:emacsen-team/apache-mode-el.git Cheers, Nicholas
