On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 04:02, Dan S <danstowell+de...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/10/19 Felipe Sateler <fsate...@debian.org>:
>> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 11:15, Dan S <danstowell+de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2010/10/9 Alexandre Quessy <alexan...@quessy.net>:
>>>> Hello Felipe and the team,
>>>>
>>>> 2010/10/6 Felipe Sateler <fsate...@debian.org>:
>>>>> On 09/21/2010 01:40 PM, Alexandre Quessy wrote:
>>>>>> There are quite a few lintian warnings, but I tried the vim plugin and
>>>>>> it works.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, quite a bit. The package needs a lot of work. First of all,
>>>>> debian/copyright needs some serious overhaul. Are you familiar with the
>>>>> codebase? If so, please take a look at that.
>>>>
>>>> No much familiar, no. Dan would know better than me.
>>>
>>> What sort of overhaul is needed? There are quite a few different
>>> copyrights asserted, making it fairly bulky, but I don't spot any
>>> wrongness.
>>
>> For starters, a whole lot of paths are wrong (they are missing the
>> common/ subdir prefix). Hmm, maybe serious overhaul is an
>> overstatement, but getting the right paths is a must, and made me
>> doubt the overall quality of the file, perhaps indicative of neglect.
>
> Ah thankyou. Yes that is neglect but fairly recent neglect, we
> reorganised the folder structure before 3.4 but it seems we forgot the
> paths in the copyright folder.

Great.

>
> OK I've fixed it now in svn.
> <http://supercollider.svn.sf.net/viewvc/supercollider/packages/ubuntu/copyright?r1=10329&r2=10403>
> Feel free to pull it in. (I'd like to help with the debian packaging
> git - could I be given access or should I start my own git and send
> pull requests?)

No, join our team and then clone the ssh address of our repository.

>
>>>>> Where did you get the packaging from? Upstream?
>>>>
>>>> Yes. I took it from the upstream SVN repository. Dan has done one more
>>>> - at least - after I took it, though. He might have removed some
>>>> files. I specifically told him about some proprietary files that he
>>>> removed. I'll double check this and let you know.
>>>>
>>>> If Dan would tell us what he changed meanwhile, that would help. Dan?
>>>
>>> I removed common/Source/lang/LangPrimSource/HID_Utilities/* since that
>>> had an apple copyright with a dubious gpl compatibility, and (in the
>>> svn packaging info) removed the apple entry from debian/copyrights as
>>> a result.
>>> (To be more accurate: We have a script that makes a pruned
>>> linux-source .tar.gz, so what I did was to add the folder to the list
>>> of what gets pruned out. The folder is still there in the upstream and
>>> used on mac.)
>>
>> Where is this pruned linux-source tar.gz? Our repository seems to have
>> the SuperCollider-3.4-Source-With-Extras-linux.tar.gz file from
>> sourceforge with md5sum 20631117a7e9fb1c862833ce424ce9f4. Should we be
>> using the without extras variant? Or maybe even another tarball?
>
> With-extras should be fine, however so far I've only tweaked the
> not-with-extras one to remove the Apple files
> (SuperCollider-3.4-rev2-Source-linux.tar.gz at
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/supercollider/files/Source/3.4/ ).
> We're hoping to get 3.4.1 released very soon so I'll include these
> tweaks in that.

What are the extras? The without extras tarball seems to be much smaller.

And if there are conflictive files we should use the pruned tarballs.


-- 

Saludos,
Felipe Sateler

_______________________________________________
pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list
pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers

Reply via email to