Bug#1025375: hydrogen-doc: documentation binary package is almost empty, should it be dropped entirely?
On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 20:56:49 -0500 Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > Control: forwarded -1 > https://github.com/hydrogen-music/documentation/issues/73 > > Dear Francesco, > > I've enjoyed reading and learning from your analyses on debian-legal, > and I'm happy it was you who noticed this issue and filed this bug! Wow, thanks for the kind words! :-) > [edit: sorry for the delay, it seems I forgot to send this draft 22 Dec > 2022] Oh well... > > There is hope, and GPL2+ licensed docs are pending, but upstream may not > be able to meet our deadlines. I suspect a statement of yours upstream > may expedite the process ;) tldr: It looks to me like the remaining two > old contributors contributed documentation under GPL2+ and that there > isn't any need to rubber-stamp the new documentation subproject, because > their contributions remain inherently GPL2+ licensed, because that > license could not have been legally stripped by moving their work from > the GPL2+ Hydrogen project to the accidentally license-less period of the > Hydrogen/Documentation subproject. OK, let me understand. If I read the Github issue correctly, the SVN repository was split into two separate Git ones (one for the program and one for the documentation), but the license was not copied to the documentation Git repository by mistake. Hence, all the documentation contributions that were made before the repository split are under the license of the program (GPL-2+). All the documentation contributions made after the split are in a legal limbo. But almost all the corresponding contributors sent their consent to license their contributions under GPL-2+, except for two of them, who have not yet showed up... This two MIA contributors are @jeremyz (former member of the development team, active before and after the split and still occasionally online) and @thijz (former member of the development team, active only after the split, but currently vanished). Is this a reasonably accurate summary? Assuming it is, I think the only problem left is due to these two contributors. Ideally they could be tracked down and asked for their consent to the explicit licensing of the documentation. If this cannot be done, what is the extent of their (post-split) contributions to the documentation? I mean: can the documentation do without their (post-split) contributions? Some of their contributions could have already been replaced by material written by others. Those contributions that are still present in the current documentation could be dropped entirely and replaced by something else. Would it be too hard? [...] > I'd be totally OK with you (or someone else) taking up the baton for > these two interrelated bugs. (1025375 and 1020936) I am really sorry, but I lack the spare time to take care of this... :-( -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! . Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE pgpHtcQR6vF04.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#1025375: hydrogen-doc: documentation binary package is almost empty, should it be dropped entirely?
Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/hydrogen-music/documentation/issues/73 Dear Francesco, I've enjoyed reading and learning from your analyses on debian-legal, and I'm happy it was you who noticed this issue and filed this bug! [edit: sorry for the delay, it seems I forgot to send this draft 22 Dec 2022] There is hope, and GPL2+ licensed docs are pending, but upstream may not be able to meet our deadlines. I suspect a statement of yours upstream may expedite the process ;) tldr: It looks to me like the remaining two old contributors contributed documentation under GPL2+ and that there isn't any need to rubber-stamp the new documentation subproject, because their contributions remain inherently GPL2+ licensed, because that license could not have been legally stripped by moving their work from the GPL2+ Hydrogen project to the accidentally license-less period of the Hydrogen/Documentation subproject. In terms of strategy/plan, a near-empty bin:hydrogen-doc in src:hydrogen keeps the door open for this: In the event upstream is too slow, we populate src:hydrogen's bin:hydrogen-doc with the new documentation from the upstream "Hydrogen/Documentation" subproject during the freeze. If upstream moves quickly enough then it may be possible to for a src:hydrogen-documentation upload to experimental that takes over bin:hydrogen-docs to clear the NEW queue; after that, it would be possible to drop bin:hydrogen-docs from src:hydrogen package in unstable. To be honest, I'm not sure if there will be enough time for an ideal solution, and I'm not convinced that a separate NEW src:hydrogen-documentation package would be ideal, but I preemptively filed an RFP (with context) in case someone preferred[s] this solution and wanted[s] to start work on it: https://bugs.debian.org/1020936 I'd be totally OK with you (or someone else) taking up the baton for these two interrelated bugs. (1025375 and 1020936) Cheers, Nicholas signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#1025375: hydrogen-doc: documentation binary package is almost empty, should it be dropped entirely?
Package: hydrogen-doc Version: 1.2.0~beta1+dfsg-1 Severity: important Hello and thanks for maintaining Hydrogen in Debian! I noticed that the hydrogen-doc binary package is now almost empty: $ dpkg -L hydrogen-doc /. /usr /usr/share /usr/share/doc /usr/share/doc/hydrogen-doc /usr/share/doc/hydrogen-doc/changelog.Debian.gz /usr/share/doc/hydrogen-doc/changelog.gz /usr/share/doc/hydrogen-doc/copyright /usr/share/hydrogen /usr/share/hydrogen/data /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/Bridge1_4th.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/Bridge3_3a_hh.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/C3_6+7.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/Intro4th.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/PatternBase1.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/PatternBase2.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/Riff1b.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/Riff1c.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/Riff1d.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/Verse8th.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/VerseAll.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/VerseBridge.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/VerseBridge_hh.png /usr/share/hydrogen/data/new_tutorial/img_tutorial/warn.png /usr/share/lintian /usr/share/lintian/overrides /usr/share/lintian/overrides/hydrogen-doc /usr/share/doc/hydrogen-doc/manual_and_old_tutorial /usr/share/doc/hydrogen-doc/new_tutorial $ ls -l /usr/share/doc/hydrogen-doc/manual_and_old_tutorial lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 23 Nov 27 20:22 /usr/share/doc/hydrogen-doc/manual_and_old_tutorial -> ../../hydrogen/data/doc $ readlink -f /usr/share/doc/hydrogen-doc/manual_and_old_tutorial /usr/share/hydrogen/data/doc $ ls /usr/share/hydrogen/data/doc ls: cannot access '/usr/share/hydrogen/data/doc': No such file or directory Basically a bunch of screenshots and a dangling symlink... Then I took a look at the 'changelog.Debian.gz' file, which says: [...] * Clean Hydrogen of currently non-DFSG new documentation - Use Files-Excluded to exclude tutorial_en.html, which has no source. [...] OK, I totally agree with excluding non-free documentation (while in the meanwhile contacting upstream and persuading them to properly release source for the documentation and license it under DFSG-free terms[^NOTE], something which I hope you have already done or are going to do very soon!). [^NOTE]: the best option would to license documentation under the same terms as the documented program (GPL-2+ in this case)... But, if, after excluding non-free documentation, almost nothing remains in the -doc binary package, I wonder what's the point in keeping this binary package around... Is there a reasonable hope that the documentation will be re-licensed in a DFSG-free manner (with source available) real soon now? If not, I would say that binary package 'hydrogen-doc' could be dropped entirely... Please let me know what you think. Thanks for your time! :-) -- System Information: Debian Release: bookworm/sid APT prefers testing APT policy: (800, 'testing'), (500, 'unstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 6.0.0-5-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU threads; PREEMPT) Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_US:en Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled -- no debconf information
