Le Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 11:13:24AM +0200, Gergely Nagy a écrit :
>
> My understanding is, that it should be a complete overview of the source
> licenses. I do not treat generated files as source, because,
> well... they're not.
>
> They might come in the source tarball, like the autotools-generat
Sven Hoexter writes:
> The question is what should be achieved with d/copyright?
> Give just a short overview over the main parts of the package or a complete
> overview of the complete package contents?
My understanding is, that it should be a complete overview of the source
licenses. I do not
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:26:36AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote:
Hi,
> ..and configure scripts have parts of autotools, Makefile.ins contain
> code from automake, and even compiled binaries contain stuff that
> originates from the compiler.
>
> I don't think these should be documented in debian/cop
Nikolaus Rath writes:
> My sponsor requested me to add debian/copyright entries for files in the
> generated HTML documentation. The documentation is generated by Sphinx,
> and Sphinx adds some templates and js libraries which are then covered
> (at least that's what I believe) by the Sphinx lice
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 19:23:01 -0400
Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> > I don't personally think it's interesting or relevant to record in
> > debian/copyright the license of generated files, and there is certainly
> > nothing in Policy that requires you to do this. Why do you ask?
>
>
> My sponsor reques
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 19:54:14 -0400
Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Neil Williams writes:
> > On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:54:53 -0400
> > Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> >
> >> I understand that a DEP5 copyright file lists licenses and copyrights
> >> for files in the debian source package directory, rather than for f
Neil Williams writes:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:54:53 -0400
> Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>
>> I understand that a DEP5 copyright file lists licenses and copyrights
>> for files in the debian source package directory, rather than for files
>> that are installed by the generated .deb.
>>
>> Does that mea
Steve Langasek writes:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 02:54:53PM -0400, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>> I understand that a DEP5 copyright file lists licenses and copyrights
>> for files in the debian source package directory, rather than for files
>> that are installed by the generated .deb.
>
>> Does that me
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 02:54:53PM -0400, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> I understand that a DEP5 copyright file lists licenses and copyrights
> for files in the debian source package directory, rather than for files
> that are installed by the generated .deb.
> Does that mean that files that are *generat
On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:54:53 -0400
Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> I understand that a DEP5 copyright file lists licenses and copyrights
> for files in the debian source package directory, rather than for files
> that are installed by the generated .deb.
>
> Does that mean that files that are *generated*
Hi,
I understand that a DEP5 copyright file lists licenses and copyrights
for files in the debian source package directory, rather than for files
that are installed by the generated .deb.
Does that mean that files that are *generated* during execution of
debian/rules (e.g. rendered documentation)
11 matches
Mail list logo
