Jussi Lehtola wrote:
On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 11:22 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
[clip]
Somewhat oversimplified, this guideline essentially means: "If the
tarball has a license file, then you must include it - if it doesn't,
you must not create one"
I've never encountered hitherto an interpretation in which a license
file has to be created if upstream hasn't supplied any.
Well, packagers wanting to add license files had been a common case in
the early Fedora days.
It had been (and still occasionally is) a typical packaging newcomer
mistake, originating from people who interpret "include license files"
as "must add one, if not present".
You can still find packages which do so in Fedora.
AFAIK that is
the policy in Debian, not in Fedora.
No idea what Debian does.
Maybe it should be made clearer in the guidelines what must be done also
in this case.
This section is almost as old as Fedora. It has hardly been a problem
before.
Ralf
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
