On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 10:48 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 09:38:56AM +0200, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> >Packagingwise, I think it is fine, but I'm umcomfortable with the two 
> >patches. First, please use the patch metadata as described in 
> >http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/.
> Oh, only saw this _after_ sending off same suggestion myself.  Sorry for 
> the noice :-)
> >But as for the actual patches, I'm rather uncomfortable with
> >them. The add-license patch adds the complete text of the GPL. I'm not
> >sure how the ftpteam thinks about it, but to me it feels very
> >strange. Is upstream aware of the problem, can't they just reissue the
> >tarball with the complete license text? Moreover, quoting the part "How
> >to Apply These Term to Your New Programs" is usually also helpful.
> >
> >I'd be more comfortable if the GPL text was just included in debian/,
> >read, as non-patch, but still, I really think this file should be part
> >of the orig.tar.gz. So another approach would be to repackage the
> >tarball to just include the COPYING file. While we are at it, we could
> >also use the new Makefile and get rid of the other patch.
> I really don't get the logic of _adding_ a license at all.
> I know that GPL boilerplate mentions that you are supposed to receive a 
> COPYING file together with source, but I do not see it being _mandatory_ 
> so if upstream fails to do it I suppose we are allowed to redistribute 
> verbatim - i.e. also lacking same file.
> If it is not for licensing reasons but due to being meeded by the code 
> at runtime, then I suggest copying/symlinking the file below 
> /usr/share/common-licenses instead.

It is actually not needed for running the program, but the libdir format
for Pd libraries proposed by Hans-Christoph Steiner defines a
LICENSE.txt and README.txt to be included in every Pd library. 

Currently, the quilt patch adds the license which is later replaced by a
symlink (see debian/links). I think I remove the patch and simply leave
the symlink.


pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list

Reply via email to