Re: What licenses should be included in /usr/share/common-licenses?

Andrey Rakhmatullin <[email protected]> Tue, 28 Apr 2026 12:32:03 +0500

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.general
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On Tue, Apr 28, 2026 at 08:39:54AM +0200, Agathe Porte wrote:
>When dealing with d/copyright and when a license is present on the
>system, I am still puzzled if I should include a partial text of the
>license [1], or just refer to the path on the system [2].
>
>[1]
>
>	License: GPL-2
>	 This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
>	 it under the terms of the GNU General Public License, v2, as
>	 published by the Free Software Foundation
>	 .
>	 This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>	 but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>	 MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
>	 GNU General Public License for more details.
>	 .
>	 You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along
>	 with this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation, Inc.,
>	 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA.
>	 .
>	 On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public
>	 License version 2 can be found in \`/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2'.
>
>[2]
>
>	License: GPL-2
>	 On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public
>	 License version 2 can be found in \`/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2'.

The first form is, AFAIK, known as the license grant.

>Since you studied the subject, I wonder which one we should recommend.
>Maybe this is explained in the policy already, which I admit I did not
>read in detail.

It's not, the policy bug is #904729.


-- 
WBR, wRAR

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 894 B)