On Mi, Mai 26, 2010 at 09:17:14 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 06:59:00AM +0000, siret...@users.alioth.debian.org > wrote: >>The following commit has been merged in the master branch: >>commit e0636d22570edd78dcc81797f84336ffbd810b95 >>Author: Reinhard Tartler <siret...@tauware.de> >>Date: Wed May 26 08:30:37 2010 +0200 >> >> copy in mencoder.c from upstream >> >> this is a cowboy approach that places mencoder.c in >> debian/mencoder.c. This is of course a gross hack and should be reverted >> on the next upstream upgrade. > > [ huge patch snippet ] > >>diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules >>index 0ba540f..c9c289d 100755 >>--- a/debian/rules >>+++ b/debian/rules >>@@ -93,8 +93,12 @@ endif >> # https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DistCompilerFlags >> CLEAN_ENV=env -u CFLAGS -u CPPFLAGS -u LDFLAGS -u FFLAGS -u CXXFLAGS >> >>+# cowboy in mencoder.c manually fetched from upstream to avoid having to >>reroll >>+# a new upstream tarball. Will be dropped with a new upstream upgrade >>+mencoder.c: debian/mencoder.c > > I fail to see the point in hiding upstream code in the Debian packaging > - even without mentioning it in debian/copyright!
mencoder has exactly the same copyright as mplayer itself. My reading of debian/copyright does not leave any concerns about the licensing of mencoder. What parts are unclear according to your reading? > Rolling a new tarball does not trigger ftpmaster approval through the > NEW queue, new binary packages does, so that is bound to happen anyway. Correct. > I strongly suggest to either place it as a proper patch with DEP3 > header, or roll a new tarball. I disagree here. IMO, DEP3 is still way too much in flux to be seriously considered, please don't force me to use it. Moreover, DEP3 (currently) mandates a lot of very annoying and hairsplitting work by considering each and every source file which is not exactly required by debian policy. My opinion might change if DEP3 matures and #472199 makes progress. > And to document its licensing if placed below debian/ . I could also have added it as patch in debian/patches, but I think that would have been even sillier. BTW, exactly this approach has been used before with the vdpau headers. -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list email@example.com http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers