On 11 November 2012 16:39, Rafael Laboissiere <raf...@laboissiere.net> wrote: > * Carnė Draug <carandraug+...@gmail.com> [2012-11-11 13:34]: >> >> Fix with r11422. Can I further help with this by creating a proper >> COPYRIGHT file for the package? I already tried to follow the debian >> upstream guide http://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamGuide#Licenses that asks to >> list each file and its license. > > This is not really necessary, but may help. When putting together Debian > packages, We use a tool called licencecheck (in package devscripts) that > parses every upstream file and automatically generate a copyright file > according to DEP5 (http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/). This file is further > edited for reducing the number of stanzas. I am attaching below the current > debian/copyright file of the Debian package, which gets installed as > /usr/share/doc/octave-image/copyright.
That script is actually quite useful. I've been meaning to write something like that for us for ages. However, it won't catch certain exceptions. For example, the function edge was not only GPL. One of its options had a user-written license which was stated in the middle of the file. This is no longer the case and we are rejecting such licenses http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/removal-of-non-standard-licenses-in-Octave-Forge-td4645841.html The DEP5 format is still a bit too complicated to parse automatically and I don't want to cause problems to other distros. But I will try to add the list of copyright owners names to the copyright file too and run licensecheck to see if it struggles with anything. >>> On 11 November 2012 09:54, Rafael Laboissiere <raf...@laboissiere.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>> 3) The function fftconv2 gives a wrong result when called like this: >>> "fftconv2 (vector1, vector2, matrix)", although this usage is advertised in >>> the help string. For the Debian package, I am planning to apply the patch >>> attached below, which (i) removes the advertisement from the help string, >>> (ii) gives an error message when the function is called with the said usage >>> and (iii) drop the tests with the said usage. >> >> You forgot to attach the patch. > > Sorry. Attached now. > >> I don't know what changed to make this usage stop working so I only left a >> note on the source code and should not appear on the help string (at least >> it doesn't on my system). Do not remove the tests, mark them with xtest >> instead. I think I have done that before but apparently forgot to commit. >> I'd give a warning instead of an error since the reason it fails may be due >> to changes in the other functions it uses and users with different versions >> may actually get the correct results. Please see r11421. > > > Well, IMHO it is not a good idea to allow function to give results that are > known to be wrong. I will see with the other members of the DOG (Debian > Octave Group) how we should proceed while waiting for the fix from upstream. Do you know when they stopped working? Do the tests also failed back on Octave 3.2.4 in Debian stable? Carnë ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_nov _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
