Web lists-archives.com

Re: A proposal for improving transparency of the FTP NEW process




On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 13:51 +0100, Gert Wollny wrote:
> How do you want to achieve this with a source package that has 13k+
> source files and where upstream does not provide a standard license
> header for each file? I.e. there is some license text and it needs to
> be quoted, but licensecheck doesn't detect the license or doesn't
> detect the copyright entry, so one has to manually inspect many files
> to get it right. 

If upstream and the package uploader togehter don't make the copyright
status so clear it's easy for ftp master (or anyone else) to review,
then yes, I think we'd be better off with not adding that software to
Debian. Ftp master time is a scarce resource, I think we should try to
be careful of how we spend it.

> Do you really want to reject these packages outright from Debian, even
> though they follow the DFSG?

Do we really want to pile on more work on an already busy team just so
you can do less?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part