Bug#1111126: Policy change and technical adjustments

Alex <[email protected]> Sun, 17 May 2026 11:47:57 +0200

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.policy
Message-ID	<87fr3qwenm.fsf__2813.97020896605$1779011485$gmane$org@t400deb>

>> They are simply statements about copyright, not new licenses.
>> Non-copyrightability of these files is another argument why I think
>> there should be no expectation (e.g. via Lintian) to have to assign them
>> any copyright information in the first place.
>
> I admit to being a little confused about why you are having issues with
> Lintian that I've never seen, but perhaps it was a recent change?
>
> I would just use a File: * stanza with the general package license and let
> it cover such files and not give it a second thought. It is not worth your
> time and energy, or the time and energy of someone reading
> debian/copyright, to worry about whether those files are copyrightable or
> not.

This might be an artifact of spdx2debian not (always or by default or
never; would have to investigate) generating a catch-all Files: *
stanza. If a project is fully SPDX/REUSE compliant, spdx2debian can
(theoretically) generate an exhaustive and correct d/copyright for all
non-licensing related files without resorting to
catch-all-but-not-really-all blocks. This might make d/copyright files
less readable but more accurate/technically correct.

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 865 B)