We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
copyright
A bit related to the discussion in #1112
Debian introduced a machine-readable format for adding licensing information to packages and it looks like the proposal (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep5/) is accepted and now "1.0". Should we consider adding those? https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Some challenges may be to mark individual files? (i.e. there may be files having a different license).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
FWIW; the containerd.io package already has this file, but it looks to be incorrect, as it also includes runc, which is not mentioned in the file; https://github.com/docker/containerd-packaging/blob/d6a7e6e2f349710e71a409a6cf2527f48b12e864/debian/copyright
containerd.io
runc
Sorry, something went wrong.
No branches or pull requests
A bit related to the discussion in #1112
Debian introduced a machine-readable format for adding licensing information to packages and it looks like the proposal (https://dep-team.pages.debian.net/deps/dep5/) is accepted and now "1.0". Should we consider adding those?
https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
Some challenges may be to mark individual files? (i.e. there may be files having a different license).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: