On 09/16/2015 10:41 AM, Jaromír Mikeš wrote: > Ok ... if we thinking packaging these files what about licensing? > There is already one bug opened ... > > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=773246 > > IOhannes can you suggest complete list of packages we could provide > and containing drumkits? >
i don't use them, so i'm probably not the best person to ask :-) however, i took a look at the package, and here is what i think: - first of all, upstream doesn't "release" (in a formal release-process) drumkits at all. i don't think that attaching the hydrogen version number to the drumkits is a very good idea in the first place (sticking with the date of the snapshot is saner) - upstream doesn't even provide a tarball for the drumkits. instead we (Debian) create a fake tarball by aggregating all downloads published via their drumkit feed (DKF). that's a slightly awkward situation. - the DKF provides some extra information (author, description, license,...). since the upstream tarball is synthesized anyhow, this information could be used to synthesize debian (binary) packages as well: just provide a single drumkit per package¹. the biggest problem i see here, is that this makes the number of Debian packages variable. otoh, if we are not doing too many snapshots and keep old drumkits (not published by upstream any more), then the work should be reasonable. i *think* this should be done semi-automatically, using a script downloading the drumkits and providing a debian/control stub that has all the information updated. - licensing is a *complete* mess. the DKF is kind enough to provide licensing information provided by the authors (in a free form; so not really machine parsable) cool. the bad news is, that many drumkit package creators did not care about licenses, and just left the license field empty :-( worse, some drumkits have a license text like: "Do not redistribute or publish the inluded samples." here's a list: - GSCW Kit 1 (Flac edition) - GSCW Kit 2 (Flac edition) - Roland_MC-307_CR78&Cheaps - Roland_MC-307_TR-606 - Roland_MC-307_TR-808_ - Roland_MC-307_TR-909 - Roland_MC-307_Techno1 which leaves only these drumkits that have a free license (mostly some CC; and 'Lightning1024' says "Free!" whatever this means) - DeathMetal (sf) - circAfrique v4 - BJA_Pacific - The Black Pearl 1.0 - Gimme A Hand 1.0 - rumpf_kit_z01_gm - belofilms.com - AC-Guitar-Strums (flac) - Audiophob - Drumkit excepcional - Lightning1024 - Denon CRB-90 that's still 194MB, but having a closer look reveals, that 136MB of those are consumed by "belofilms.com - AC-Guitar-Strums (flac)". which is not a proper drumkit at all, so i guess it could be factored out into a separate binary package. i haven't checked the rest, but if they are all "drum" kits, then we might want to put them into a single package (~58MB). or split them into something like: - hydrogen-drumkits-classical - hydrogen-drumkits-ethno (or hydrogen-drumkits-percussion) - hydrogen-drumkits-electro - hydrogen-drumkits-effects mgfdsr IOhannes ¹ yes, even though i said that was overkill in my last mail.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
