Some comments below: On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Scott Kitterman < [email protected]> wrote:
> > Unfortunately, the rails-4.0 is not in a condition to be accepted in the > Debian > archive at the moment. In my review, I found a number of issues major and > minor that should be corrected. Some of these may exist in the existing > rails > package, I did not check. If so, these are bugs in the package. > > There is no need to ship debian/patches/series as an empty file in format > 3.0 > (quilt). It will be created if needed. > That is surely not a reason while to reject package, right? > All of the Conflicts/Replaces relationships in debia/control should be > Breaks/Replaces. > Mostly done with the exception of virtual packages. > There is at least one case of an extra copy of the MIT license file being > installed. These should be removed. > > usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby/rails/generators/rails/plugin_new/templates/MIT-LICENSE > Nope, the license file is there for templating new projects and has it's place there. > actionpack/lib/action_dispatch/journey/parser.rb is a generated file. It > looks > like the source needed to regenerate it during build (parser.y) is there, > but > the package build does not do this. The generated file is not the > preferred > form of modification, so in Debian we need to ensure the identical file > can be > generated. The best way to do this is to regenerate it during package > build. In > some cases, it's OK to just manually verify things can be rebuilt and not > do it > during the build, but only if there is a substantial barrier to actually > rebuilding it. That's unlikely to be the case here. > Regenerating parser.rb with racc now. > Although there is not confusion about the intended license, it is better > for the > license header to be put in each file rather than just a copy of the > license in > each top level directory (there are some files that do have this). (not a > reject > issue, but something you might discuss with upstream) > > Files copyright David Heinemeier Hansson are Copyright (c) 2004-2013 David > Heinemeier Hansson and not just 2004. > Fixed. > The following files are Copyright (c) 2006 Assaf Arkin ( > http://labnotes.org) and > under MIT and/or CC By license: > actionpack/test/controller/selector_test.rb > actionpack/test/controller/assert_select_test.rb > actionpack/lib/action_view/vendor/html-scanner/html/selector.rb > actionpack/lib/action_dispatch/testing/assertions/selector.rb > Needs to be documented in debian/copyright. > Fixed. > This icons in guides/assets/images/icons (as indicated in the README) were > done > by Stuart Rackham based on work by Jakub Steiner that appears to be © Jakub > Steiner, © Novell, Inc. As indicated on the referenced web page, these are > probably licensed GPL v2, but it's not clear and not documented in debian/ > copyright regardless. License needs to be clarified and documented. > > guides/assets/javascripts/syntaxhighlighter/shBrushCpp.js is also > Copyright 2006 > Shin, YoungJin. The additional copyright holder needs to be documented. > Removed full guides/ directory from +dfsg repacked, since it's just documentation available on the web. It might get repackaged in the future when we clear the licensing of all files. > The following jpegs have no clear license and are copyright of other > parties. > Their license needs to be clarified and (if free) documented in > debian/copyright. Otherwise they need to be removed from the package: > actionpack/test/fixtures/multipart/mona_lisa.jpg is Copyright 1995 Nicolas > Piochÿ with no license information. > Removed. It's licensed under PD-Art (from wikimedia). > guides/assets/images/jaimeiniesta.jpg says Copyright 2006, but no > indication of > who the copyright holder is. > > guides/assets/images/vijaydev.jpg is Copyright 2007 Apple Inc., all rights > reserved. > > guides/assets/images/rails_guides_kindle_cover.jpg is Copyright 2007 Apple > Inc., > all rights reserved > If you look at the contents of the files it's quite clear that the Apple Inc. copyright is some boilerplate from software that generated the picture. I am quite sure that the guides/ author's picture is not copyrighted by Apple. Same with the other author's picture. But I guess it needs clarification from them. > Please address these issues and reupload. > Done. Thanks for the review, Ondrej > Scott K > > > === > > Please feel free to respond to this email if you don't understand why > your files were rejected, or if you upload new files which address our > concerns. > > -- Ondřej Surý <[email protected]>
_______________________________________________ Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers
