Bug#1135097: Bug#885698: Bug#1135097: Bug#885698: What licenses should be included in /usr/share/common-licenses?

On Wed, Apr 29, 2026 at 11:38:49AM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> Is there objections to using SPDX abbreviations for the file names of
> licenses in base-files?
> 
> I didn't double-check if that's in the proposal, but I think that's how
> it should be done.
> 
> If we already deviate from SPDX names, then maybe moving existing files
> to SPDX-names, and recommending use of those names, and set up a symlink
> would be an improvement.  Or grandfather in them as exceptions, to avoid
> unnecessary debian/copyright churn.
> 
> It would be nice if SPDX names was mentioned in debian-policy or
> base-files/debian/README.source, so we don't forget about this aspect in
> the future.  We can always change that policy later on if it turns out
> to be a bad idea for some reason (if someone registers FOO`rm -rf /` as
> a SPDX license name, perhaps).

More generally we could have two packages:
base-files with /usr/share/common-licenses/
and a new package
spdx-license with /usr/share/spdx-licenses/ with all SPDX license used by Debian.
and have a tool that build debian/copyright from spdx-license at build time, so
spdx-license would only be needed when building packages.

Cheers,