Re: Bug#885698: What licenses should be included in /usr/share/common-licenses?

Sean Whitton <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.devel.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Santiago Vila [27/Apr  3:22pm +02] wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2026 at 03:09:54PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
>> On Mon, 2026-04-27 at 14:52:41 +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> > On Apr 27, Mechtilde Stehmann <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > The issue at hand is the inclusion of additional license texts in the
>> > > base-files package.
>>
>> > I think that there was a consensus back then and there is still one now.
>> > Do you volunteer to NMU base-files, if the maintainer is not
>> > interested in working on this?
>>
>> Uh, what? I'm pretty certain Santiago would be happy to update
>> base-files *once* debian-policy has been updated, but certainly not
>> before. So instead of unnecessarily throwing shade, perhaps get
>> debian-policy updated first?
>
> Indeed.
>
> Here is a quote from base-files FAQ for those who never bothered to read it:
>
>
> Q. Why isn't license "foo" included in common-licenses?
>
> A. I delegate such decisions to the policy group. If you want to
> propose a new license you should make a policy proposal to modify the
> paragraph in policy saying "Packages distributed under the Apache
> license (version 2.0), the Artistic license, the GNU GPL (versions 1,
> 2, or 3), the GNU LGPL (versions 2, 2.1, or 3), and the GNU FDL
> (versions 1.2 or 1.3) should refer to the corresponding files under
> /usr/share/common-licenses". The way of doing this is explained in the
> debian-policy package. As usual, you should always take a look at
> already reported bugs against debian-policy before submitting a new
> one.

I'm sorry, I just posted to #1135097 stating the opposite ..

I think that the "at least 100 packages" part of this proposal is too
low a bar.  But perhaps the traditional "deduplicating it would save
disk space on the majority of Debian installations" is too high a bar.

Any thoughts on something in between?

-- 
Sean Whitton
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 869 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=NDur
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.