On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 04:02, Dan S <[email protected]> wrote: > 2010/10/19 Felipe Sateler <[email protected]>: >> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 11:15, Dan S <[email protected]> wrote: >>> 2010/10/9 Alexandre Quessy <[email protected]>: >>>> Hello Felipe and the team, >>>> >>>> 2010/10/6 Felipe Sateler <[email protected]>: >>>>> 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 [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
