Bug#788726: [src:jspwiki] Some sources are not included in your package
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 17:19:13 +0200 Markus Koschanywrote: > I wonder if it is really worth to keep jspwiki > though. It has a very low popcon value and cannot be part of the main > distribution. Since Emmanuel has done some recent work on the package, I > think he should make this decision. I had a velleity to do something about jspwiki but it hasn't materialized. I don't use jspwiki nor plan to use it, nobody has enquired about the package for years and there are good alternatives. I think it's preferable to remove it until someone really motivated steps in. Emmanuel Bourg
Bug#788726: [src:jspwiki] Some sources are not included in your package
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 05:19:13PM +0200, Markus Koschany wrote: Control: tags -1 confirmed On 14.06.2015 18:42, bastien ROUCARIÈS wrote: Package: src:jspwiki Version: 2.8.0-6 user: lintian-ma...@debian.org usertags: source-is-missing severity: serious X-Debbugs-CC: ftpmas...@debian.org Hi, Your package includes some files that seem to lack sources in prefered forms of modification: src/webdocs/scripts/posteditor.js src/webdocs/scripts/mootools.js Indeed these Javascript files are minified and are not the preferred form of modification. I wonder if it is really worth to keep jspwiki though. It has a very low popcon value and cannot be part of the main distribution. Since Emmanuel has done some recent work on the package, I think he should make this decision. +1 from me. jspwiki is extremely crufty and out-of-date. It would be best to remove it, unless Emmanuel objects. tony signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#788726: [src:jspwiki] Some sources are not included in your package
Package: src:jspwiki Version: 2.8.0-6 user: lintian-ma...@debian.org usertags: source-is-missing severity: serious X-Debbugs-CC: ftpmas...@debian.org Hi, Your package includes some files that seem to lack sources in prefered forms of modification: src/webdocs/scripts/posteditor.js src/webdocs/scripts/mootools.js According to Debian Free Software Guidelines [1] (DFSG) #2: The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form. In some cases this could also constitute a license violation for some copyleft licenses such as the GNU GPL. (While sometimes the licence allows not to ship the source, the DFSG always mandates source code.) In order to solve this problem, you could: 1. add the source files to debian/missing-sources directory. 2. repack the origin tarball and add the missing source files to it. Both way satisfy the requirement to ship all source code. The second option might be preferable due to the following reasons [2]: - Upstream can do it too and you could even supply a patch to them, thus full filling our social contract [3], see particularly §2. - If source and non-source are in different locations, ftpmasters may miss the source and (needlessly) reject the package. - The source isn't duplicated in every .diff.gz/.debian.tar.* (though this only really matters for larger sources). You could also ask debian...@lists.debian.org or #debian-qa for more guidance. [1] https://www.debian.org/social_contract.en.html#guidelines [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=736873#8 [3] https://www.debian.org/social_contract signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#788726: [src:jspwiki] Some sources are not included in your package
Control: tags -1 confirmed On 14.06.2015 18:42, bastien ROUCARIÈS wrote: Package: src:jspwiki Version: 2.8.0-6 user: lintian-ma...@debian.org usertags: source-is-missing severity: serious X-Debbugs-CC: ftpmas...@debian.org Hi, Your package includes some files that seem to lack sources in prefered forms of modification: src/webdocs/scripts/posteditor.js src/webdocs/scripts/mootools.js Indeed these Javascript files are minified and are not the preferred form of modification. I wonder if it is really worth to keep jspwiki though. It has a very low popcon value and cannot be part of the main distribution. Since Emmanuel has done some recent work on the package, I think he should make this decision. Markus signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature