formatted copyright file errors
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
libgphoto |
Unknown
|
Unknown
|
|||
libgphoto2 (Debian) |
Fix Released
|
Unknown
|
|||
libgphoto2 (Ubuntu) |
Triaged
|
Low
|
Unassigned |
Bug Description
Hi,
The debian/copyright file is formatted (per draft Dep5) but has errors respecting the current version of the spec. (http://
I'll attach three items:
* a report of the copyright generated by my copyright parser. I generated this after fixing the copyright's first line so that it is recognized as formatted. This shows that many of the errors are in using free form text in "License: " lines, which is not allowed. Spaces delimit license assertions. Every asserted license must be either defined in place, or have a free standing stanza to define it, or be a well-known short license name per the spec. Because "NONE" is asserted as a license, I added a "License: NONE" free-standing stanza whose text indicates that no license is asserted. I also added a GPL-improper stanza (reluctantly) to handle this case, which needs review. Also, every "Files: " stanza MUST have a "License: " line (a required field), even though that seems redundant, but this aids readability.
* report of the copyright generated after I fixed it.
* a bzr diff that contains the fixes.
Please review changes for accuracy and apply.
tags: | added: patch |
tags: |
added: patch-forwarded-debian removed: patch-forwarded-upstream |
Changed in libgphoto2 (Debian): | |
status: | Unknown → New |
Changed in libgphoto2 (Debian): | |
status: | New → Fix Released |
Also might want to remove the unnecessary period (".") from
License: TODO-Not_DFSG-free.
after applying the patch.
This will prevent unnecessarily duplicated license assertions differing only by this period. See the unnecessary duplicate in comment #2's attachment, at the bottom.