On 01/09/11 07:15, Ben Finney wrote:
>
> Ximin Luo writes:
>
>> At the cost of some complexity in code, we can eliminate a lot of
>> complexity in our data.
>
> There is redundancy, yes. Is that what you're calling complexity? Or is
> there some significant complexity in the data of the ‘debian
Ximin Luo writes:
> At the cost of some complexity in code, we can eliminate a lot of
> complexity in our data.
There is redundancy, yes. Is that what you're calling complexity? Or is
there some significant complexity in the data of the ‘debian/copyright’
file that you've got in mind?
> With p
On 31/08/11 21:49, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ximin Luo writes:
>
>> OK, thanks for clarifying. I take it then that "should" implies "not
>> necessary" in this policy quote:
>
>> "A copy of the file which will be installed in
>> /usr/share/doc/package/copyright should be in debian/copyright in the
>>
Ximin Luo writes:
> OK, thanks for clarifying. I take it then that "should" implies "not
> necessary" in this policy quote:
> "A copy of the file which will be installed in
> /usr/share/doc/package/copyright should be in debian/copyright in the
> source package. "
"should" is documented at the
On 31/08/11 02:57, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ximin Luo writes:
>> On 29/08/11 17:48, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
>>> The project decided to say that our packages are intended for use on a
>>> Debian system with the essential Debian packages installed and hence
>>> not duplicate licenses that are in base-fi
Ximin Luo writes:
> On 29/08/11 17:48, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> The project decided to say that our packages are intended for use on a
>> Debian system with the essential Debian packages installed and hence
>> not duplicate licenses that are in base-files, which I think is a bit
>> of a hand-wave,
On 29/08/11 17:48, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
>> Allowing debian/copyright to rely on files _other_ than the common
>> licenses in base-files would be a larger and different change, so
>> off-topic for this bug. Unless done carefully, I don't think it's a
>> good idea.
>
>
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 11:36:45AM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Allowing debian/copyright to rely on files _other_ than the common
> licenses in base-files would be a larger and different change, so
> off-topic for this bug. Unless done carefully, I don't think it's a
> good idea.
And FWIW, si
Jonathan Nieder writes:
> Allowing debian/copyright to rely on files _other_ than the common
> licenses in base-files would be a larger and different change, so
> off-topic for this bug. Unless done carefully, I don't think it's a
> good idea.
It's important to remember that Debian has a basic
Hi,
Ximin Luo wrote:
> I don't think disk space is an issue these days
I think that's the real point of disagreement here, for what it's
worth.
common-licenses is part of base-files, which is included on every
Debian installation. Some do need to be small.
(No opinion on whether the MPL shoul
10 matches
Mail list logo
