[maemo-developers] docs and optification

[From: Josef Assad]

On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 03:37:17PM +0100, Attila Csipa wrote:
> On Sunday 13 December 2009 15:13:54 Mustali Dalal wrote:
> > Purging copyright files does not seem right; they are tiny and have legal
> > bearing.
> >
> > Since a lot, if not all, apps currently in testing use GPL or other FOSS
> > license, I would guess there be good reasons to keep the copyright file
> > installed with the package. Would there be license violation if a copyright
> > file is not installed with the package?
> >
> > or is this a non-issue for developers?

Not being a lawyer, I did the only logical thing and asked other people who
were't lawyers either. Well, #gnu really since that was the place
where I supposed license nerds might congregate...

My impression is it isn't a legal issue technically (happy to be
corrected, not being a lawyer by any stretch of the imagination). But
in principle I would usually expect a license to accompany the
distribution of software I developed.

Whether I would consider it sufficient that it is in the .deb is
another matter.

> I'm wondering maybe we could have a license package we could depend on and 
> then just use a softlink or something similar ? A Depends: license-gpl (>=3.0) 
> sounds simple enough to me and then the license is crystal clear and we don't 
> have to duplicate the license for each package and the license package can 
> provide all the legalese. It would also simplify checking/verifying proper 
> licensing in the autobuilder. Just a thought.

Well, there's already /usr/share/common-licenses

> Regards,
> Attila
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-developers mailing list
> maemo-developers at maemo.org
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers

-- 
import sig