licensecheck: fixes and improvements

[Benjamin Drung]

Am Donnerstag, den 11.10.2012, 05:15 +1100 schrieb Dmitry Smirnov:
> Dear team,
> 
> Please find attached patches for licensecheck ('jessie' branch).
> I expect them to be self-explanatory but if any doubts I'll be happy to answer 
> your questions.

Thanks. I applied patches 2, 4, and 5. For patch 4 I removed
print-defaults and tests from the GetOptions line. For patch 5 I
modified the indentation of the return statement and let the comment
begin with an capital letter.

Re code style: How should values assigned: "x = 5" or "x=5"?

Patch 1 and 3 look good. Before applying, I like to see the files that
triggers the wrong result fixed by these patches.

> Shall we change license names for compliance with 
> copyright-format-1.0: 
> 
> 	"BSD (3 clause)"    --> "BSD-3-clause"
> 	"GPL (v2 or later)" --> "GPL-2+"
> etc.?
> I hope everybody would agree with that.

Using the names from the copyright-format-1.0 sounds a good idea. What
do the other devscripts maintainer think?

-- 
Benjamin Drung
Debian & Ubuntu Developer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/devscripts-devel/attachments/20121019/cf480c57/attachment.pgp>