On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:35:33AM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On Mi, Mai 26, 2010 at 10:10:18 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 09:33:57AM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
On Mi, Mai 26, 2010 at 09:17:14 (CEST), Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

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?

debian/copyright states that the packaging (which I read as the contents of the debian/ subdir) is owned by Dariush Pietrzak and A Mennucci.

yes, from lines 1 to 20. The rest of the file talks about the upstream licensing.

...mentioning which subdir or files each licensing applies to.

Indeed there is first a general section, but as I write above, I consider the debian/ subdir as an exception to the general section - as I believe is the case for all Debian packages except those where Debian is upstream.

Thank you for telling me here(!) the source and copyright of that
particular file below debian/ - I would prefer if that information was
contained in debian/copyright too, or at least in the header of the code
(stored as a patch, conveniently leaving room for such meta info).

Since mencoder is part of mplayer, I thought the licensing was clear,
but if you find it confusing, we could clarify that in a sentence or
two in debian/copyright.

Yes, please do. Not just by mentioning the word "mencoder", but by referencing the *file* which is in the (from a licensing perspective) unusual place below debian/ .

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.

It seems to me that you are talking about DEP5 - the proposed (status: draft) machine-readable debian/copyright file format. Indeed that one is in flux (but not a lot) and even when/if decided it is only optional.

I am talking about DEP3 - the proposed (status: candidate) machine-readable debian/patches/ header format. More info here: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/

You are completely right that I horribly confused DEP3 and DEP5. We talked about debian/copyright and using patches for that matter feels really strange to me so that I must have skipped that word.

Fair enough.

I talked not only about licensing, though, but more generally about the oddity of non-Debian code included not in source tarball and not as a patch, but "hidded" among the Debian packaging code.

And specifically I did write "patch" very close to "DEP3" ;-)

I strongly suggest that you follow common patterns instead.

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.

Why do you find that sillier?

it requires additional work overhead to work (diff, update, etc.) with. Commit logs don't contain diff-on-diffs. In case mencoder.c is changed, debdiffs become more readable. Morover, changes are less likely to confuse 'git annotate'. In short: I find this approach much more practicable and easier to work with.

Thanks for clarifying :-)

I do not like your argument, though: I thought it was meant as short-term approach until next release (or snapshot) from upstream, so not important if cumbersome to maintain.

I find that debian/ subdir generally contains Debian packaging code (which should be covered with a single statement in debian/copyright), except for debian/patches/ which contains code from various sources and should then in each case be documented (using DEP3 header and if needed statements in debian/copyright too).

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to