Bug#929694: cme update dpkg-copyright removes manually added copyright entries

[Pirate Praveen]

On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:18 PM, Dominique Dumont <dod at debian.org> 
wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2019 10:36:27 +0500 Pirate Praveen 
> <praveen at onenetbeyond.org>
> wrote:
>>  justification: it should not remove any existing copyright noticed
>>  added by maintainer.
> 
> Then what's the point of running "cme update dpkg-copyright" ?
> 

To find out if we missed any copyright notices.

> Let's see what's going on:
> 
> node-gulp$ licensecheck -r make-iterator --copyright -m
> make-iterator/LICENSE   MIT/X11 (BSD like)      2014-2018 Jon 
> Schlinkert.
> make-iterator/README.md UNKNOWN 2012-2013 moutjs team and contributors
> (http:moutjs.com)
> make-iterator/index.js  UNKNOWN 2014-2018 Jon Schlinkert.
> make-iterator/package.json      UNKNOWN *No copyright*
> 
> First problem: LICENSE and README.md do not contain the same copyright
> owners. By reading the README.md file, I saw that make-iterator is
> derived from moutjs. Hence debian/copyright entry is accurate.
> 
> But how can cme decide if the discrepancy is due to upstream change or
> upstream inconsistencies ? It cannot.
> 
Don't remove anything if cme is not sure. When more than one notice is 
there, add both, I think that is safer. In this case both notices are 
still present.

> license-reconcile choose to throw an error in this case. cme trusts
> upstream files.
> 
README.md is also upstream file.

> To avoid update debian/copyright with wrong entries, you should
> override wrong copyright information in
> debian/fill.copyright.blanks.yml as described in
> Dpkg::Copyright::Scanner man page.
> 
> Note that fill.copyright.blanks can be edited with "cme edit dpkg"
> 
> 
> That said, tests done with node-gulp has shown that the way cme
> extracts information from LICENSE and README file is not ideal. I'm
> going to improve its behaviour.
> 

Thanks.

> All the best.
> 
> 
>