licensecheck still broken

[Nicholas Bamber]

On 18. 11. 15 21:08, Nicholas Bamber wrote:
> On 18. 11. 15 17:43, Dominique Dumont wrote:
>> On Wednesday 18 November 2015 08:41:42 Nicholas Bamber wrote:
>>>          Sorry I have not replied.
>>
>> No problem. I am sometimes also "distracted" by real life...
>>
>
> I do have some questions related to licensecheck more generally.
>
>
> 1.) Your thoughts on #472199? My reading of the bug report is you have
> no interest in this as you provide the functionality in cme. On the
> other hand I'd quite like something in this direction as this would
> remove the need to map between the legacy licensecheck format and DEP-5
> format.
>
> 2.) I was wondering about all the test scraps in the test/licensecheck .
> We could (or perhaps more realistically "could if we writing the tests
> now") get the test data from the Software::License module.
>
> _______________________________________________
> devscripts-devel mailing list
> devscripts-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devscripts-devel
>
>


Oh thinking about it a bit more, I guess I am asking if we could define 
what the precise role of licensecheck is.

The problem of going from wild source code to DEP-5 is hard.

You seem to have attempted that in cme and good luck to you.

I added a little of that to license-reconcile but I do not see it as its 
role. The idea is that once you have a license-reconcile config file, it 
can evolve with the source code and tie the copyright file and source 
code together with all moving in sync. That seems to me be the easiest 
approach in the long run and it asks very little of licensecheck.

It could rely on licensecheck to produce DEP-5 license tags or it could 
handle it itself. I just want that effort is only invested into that job 
in the right places. Is licensecheck the right place or 
license-reconcile and cme?

Similarly look at 
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=519080 . Is that going 
too far?

I think we should either discuss a plan for these bugs or tag them wontfix.