Bug#933248: RFS: assaultcube/1.2.0.2-1 [ITA] -- realistic first-person-shooter
Hi Tobias, > At least assaultcube-data needs to go to non-free. The engine could go > to contrib if everything required for it it is free software. > > I strongly suggest that you use keep old packaging scheme (two source > packages, assaultcube and assaultcube-data) > > I'm not sure at all if putting the data on a git repository would > violate their license. (it is not unmodified distribution then) > > Srry, I think I have to throw in towel for that package… > Please seek advice from debian-legal. I kept the old packaging scheme by separating 'assaultcube (contrib) [1]' and 'assaultcube-data (non-free) [2]' without violating copyright. Please could you analyze my two packages. :) [1] https://mentors.debian.net/package/assaultcube [2] https://mentors.debian.net/package/assaultcube-data Thanks! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Carlos Donizete Froes [a.k.a coringao] ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Wiki: https://wiki.debian.org/coringao ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ GPG: 4096R/B638B780 ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀ 2157 630B D441 A775 BEFF D35F FA63 ADA6 B638 B780 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#933248: RFS: assaultcube/1.2.0.2-1 [ITA] -- realistic first-person-shooter
On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 11:42:23PM -0300, Carlos Donizete Froes wrote: > Hi Tobias, > > > I've took a look and I have to say assultcube's license is a nightmere; > > for me it is far from clear from me what they mean… However, I cannot > > see a change on the licensing, so I guess the situation is unchanged > > and that would hint that we are still talking about non-free, at least > > for the data. > > I agree, there was no change in the license, so I left it as it was in the > orphaned package. I just organized 'debian/copyright' by adding all licenses > presented in the game directories. > > > For example, what is source in their definition? I can only assume that > > they mean the"sources.tar.gz" [1] on the release tab of their github > > repo. If that is true, there quite a lots of difference when compared > > to (what I guess is supposed to be in their terms) the game package > > labeled "AssaultCube for Linux" [2] > > The game is being mirrored in an 'experimental' branch [1], to be played on > Windows and MacOSX with the updated SDL2 library. /me confused. The dsc labels it as version 1.2.0.2, which is an officially released version by upstream [a]. That somehow collided with "mirrored in an 'experimental' branch" as you wrote above. Comparing the content of the dsc and the release from [a] shows differences (more files in the dsc). So it seems that this is not 1.2.0.2 you are packaging. And here things become to become complicated againm, as this license is really a f***up: They say: - source code is licensed under zlib like license. Ok, but what is excatly the source? I can only guess that this is [1], but that guess needs a released version to work. - Even the file marked as source ([1]) has non-free bits in it, so I guess it is not valid to say "this is the source". - the "packaged" file license says that you cannot modify the package, but says later that you might disect the package and ship the parts seperately, but only if it has a license attached to it explictily. Seems so that this is not in the case for every file… So, I'm sorry, I think I am unable to help on this licensing monster. I guess the fine people @ debian-legal might be more of an help here... Or ask upstream for clarifcation. Or you use the same approach as the old package did: split in engine and data. That has passed ftpmasters at least, so I guess it is fine. (What I probably would do is to stick to the released version.) [a] https://github.com/assaultcube/AC/releases/tag/v1.2.0.2 > With that, I just removed the directory containing prebuilt Windows binary > sources and some Makefile fixes to create the game binary. What was the base of the removal? [1] or where? > > > [2] has many MiB more files than [1], so I guess [1] is not sufficient > > to play, is it? > > No, this package is the complete game to play. ;) The dsc has more files in it than [1]… > > > If I'm correct, the problem is that [2] is "no modification allowed", > > "non commerical" and they are clear that there are bits in it that may > > only distributed "unmodified" (in their definition) [3]. So this still > > looks non-free for me. > > > > [1] https://github.com/assaultcube/AC/archive/v1.2.0.2.tar.gz > > [2] h > > ttps://github.com/assaultcube/AC/releases/download/v1.2.0.2/AssaultCube_v1.2.0 > > .2.tar.bz2 > > > > [3] https://assault.cubers.net/docs/license.html > > together with the README.md on https://github.com/assaultcube/AC > > > > > > PS: On [3] they mention ./packages/audio/misc/pickup_armour.ogg -- > > as licensed under "Creative Commons Sampling Plus 1.0", which is > > unfortunatly a non-free license [4]. This alone makes it non-free. > > > > [4] > > https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#Creative_Commons_Sampling_Plus_.28CC-sampling.2B-.29.2C_v1.0 > > Exactly, in this case would the game have to be 'non-free' rather than > 'contrib'? At least assaultcube-data needs to go to non-free. The engine could go to contrib if everything required for it it is free software. I strongly suggest that you use keep old packaging scheme (two source packages, assaultcube and assaultcube-data) I'm not sure at all if putting the data on a git repository would violate their license. (it is not unmodified distribution then) Srry, I think I have to throw in towel for that package… Please seek advice from debian-legal. > [1] https://github.com/assaultcube/AC/tree/experimental > > Thanks! > > -- > ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Carlos Donizete Froes [a.k.a coringao] > ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Wiki: https://wiki.debian.org/coringao > ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ GPG: 4096R/B638B780 > ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀ 2157 630B D441 A775 BEFF D35F FA63 ADA6 B638 B780 -- tobi
Bug#933248: RFS: assaultcube/1.2.0.2-1 [ITA] -- realistic first-person-shooter
Hi Tobias, > I've took a look and I have to say assultcube's license is a nightmere; > for me it is far from clear from me what they mean… However, I cannot > see a change on the licensing, so I guess the situation is unchanged > and that would hint that we are still talking about non-free, at least > for the data. I agree, there was no change in the license, so I left it as it was in the orphaned package. I just organized 'debian/copyright' by adding all licenses presented in the game directories. > For example, what is source in their definition? I can only assume that > they mean the"sources.tar.gz" [1] on the release tab of their github > repo. If that is true, there quite a lots of difference when compared > to (what I guess is supposed to be in their terms) the game package > labeled "AssaultCube for Linux" [2] The game is being mirrored in an 'experimental' branch [1], to be played on Windows and MacOSX with the updated SDL2 library. With that, I just removed the directory containing prebuilt Windows binary sources and some Makefile fixes to create the game binary. > [2] has many MiB more files than [1], so I guess [1] is not sufficient > to play, is it? No, this package is the complete game to play. ;) > If I'm correct, the problem is that [2] is "no modification allowed", > "non commerical" and they are clear that there are bits in it that may > only distributed "unmodified" (in their definition) [3]. So this still > looks non-free for me. > > [1] https://github.com/assaultcube/AC/archive/v1.2.0.2.tar.gz > [2] h > ttps://github.com/assaultcube/AC/releases/download/v1.2.0.2/AssaultCube_v1.2.0 > .2.tar.bz2 > > [3] https://assault.cubers.net/docs/license.html > together with the README.md on https://github.com/assaultcube/AC > > > PS: On [3] they mention ./packages/audio/misc/pickup_armour.ogg -- > as licensed under "Creative Commons Sampling Plus 1.0", which is > unfortunatly a non-free license [4]. This alone makes it non-free. > > [4] > https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#Creative_Commons_Sampling_Plus_.28CC-sampling.2B-.29.2C_v1.0 Exactly, in this case would the game have to be 'non-free' rather than 'contrib'? [1] https://github.com/assaultcube/AC/tree/experimental Thanks! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Carlos Donizete Froes [a.k.a coringao] ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Wiki: https://wiki.debian.org/coringao ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ GPG: 4096R/B638B780 ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀ 2157 630B D441 A775 BEFF D35F FA63 ADA6 B638 B780 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#933248: RFS: assaultcube/1.2.0.2-1 [ITA] -- realistic first-person-shooter
Control: tags -1 moreinfo Hi Carlos, On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 22:37:36 -0300 Carlos Donizete Froes < corin...@riseup.net> wrote: > Hi Boyuan Yang, > > > While I haven't looked into your package (yet), I do have some questions: > > Yes, OK! :) > > > how will you handle the situation that source package assaultcube- data also > > provides the binary package assaultcube-data? > > I mirrored the upstream game where 'assaultcube-data' would have a directory > containing prebuilt binary Windows fonts that were deleted. Leaving only the > game source files. > > > What's the reason of moving it from non-free to main area? If assaultcube-data > > is already free, why would it still be in the contrib section? > > This was also my question, because each directory and file contained in the game > has different licenses for each author. I need to know with the sponsor who will > see my package. I've took a look and I have to say assultcube's license is a nightmere; for me it is far from clear from me what they mean… However, I cannot see a change on the licensing, so I guess the situation is unchanged and that would hint that we are still talking about non-free, at least for the data. For example, what is source in their definition? I can only assume that they mean the"sources.tar.gz" [1] on the release tab of their github repo. If that is true, there quite a lots of difference when compared to (what I guess is supposed to be in their terms) the game package labeled "AssaultCube for Linux" [2] [2] has many MiB more files than [1], so I guess [1] is not sufficient to play, is it? If I'm correct, the problem is that [2] is "no modification allowed", "non commerical" and they are clear that there are bits in it that may only distributed "unmodified" (in their definition) [3]. So this still looks non-free for me. [1] https://github.com/assaultcube/AC/archive/v1.2.0.2.tar.gz [2] h ttps://github.com/assaultcube/AC/releases/download/v1.2.0.2/AssaultCube_v1.2.0.2.tar.bz2 [3] https://assault.cubers.net/docs/license.html together with the README.md on https://github.com/assaultcube/AC PS: On [3] they mention ./packages/audio/misc/pickup_armour.ogg -- as licensed under "Creative Commons Sampling Plus 1.0", which is unfortunatly a non-free license [4]. This alone makes it non-free. [4] https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#Creative_Commons_Sampling_Plus_.28CC-sampling.2B-.29.2C_v1.0 -- tobi
Bug#933248: RFS: assaultcube/1.2.0.2-1 [ITA] -- realistic first-person-shooter
Hi Boyuan Yang, > While I haven't looked into your package (yet), I do have some questions: Yes, OK! :) > how will you handle the situation that source package assaultcube-data also > provides the binary package assaultcube-data? I mirrored the upstream game where 'assaultcube-data' would have a directory containing prebuilt binary Windows fonts that were deleted. Leaving only the game source files. > What's the reason of moving it from non-free to main area? If > assaultcube-data > is already free, why would it still be in the contrib section? This was also my question, because each directory and file contained in the game has different licenses for each author. I need to know with the sponsor who will see my package. Thanks! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Carlos Donizete Froes [a.k.a coringao] ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Wiki: https://wiki.debian.org/coringao ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ GPG: 4096R/B638B780 ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀ 2157 630B D441 A775 BEFF D35F FA63 ADA6 B638 B780 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#933248: RFS: assaultcube/1.2.0.2-1 [ITA] -- realistic first-person-shooter
While I haven't looked into your package (yet), I do have some questions: how will you handle the situation that source package assaultcube-data also provides the binary package assaultcube-data? What's the reason of moving it from non-free to main area? If assaultcube-data is already free, why would it still be in the contrib section? Thanks, Boyuan Yang On Sun, 28 Jul 2019 03:43:58 -0300 Carlos Donizete Froes wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "assaultcube" > > * Package name: assaultcube >Version : 1.2.0.2-1 >Upstream Author : Rabid Viper Productions > * URL : http://assault.cubers.net > * License : GPL-2+ or Zlib >Section : contrib/games > > It builds those binary packages: > > assaultcube - realistic first-person-shooter > assaultcube-data - realistic first-person-shooter (data file) > > To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: > > https://mentors.debian.net/package/assaultcube > > Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: > > dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/contrib/a/assaultcube/assaultcube_1.2.0.2-1.dsc > > More information about assaultcube can be obtained from https://gitlab.com/coringao/assaultcube. > > Changes since the last upload: > > assaultcube (1.2.0.2-1) unstable; urgency=medium > > * New upstream release (Closes: #726355, #727026, #779617) > * Added files: > + d/assaultcube.6 - Manpages used from previous version. > + d/assaultcube.docs. > + d/assaultcube-data.install. > + d/assaultcube-data.links. > + d/assaultcube-server.6 - Manpages used from previous version. > + d/clean - Removing the bin_unix directory. > + d/manpages. > * Removed files (outdated): > - d/assaultcube.dirs. > - d/assaultcube.lintian-overrides. > - d/assautcube.xpm. > - d/autoreconf. > - d/compat. > - d/patches. > - d/README.Debian. > - d/README.source. > * debian/assaultcube.desktop: Updated '.desktop' application shortcut file. > * debian/assaultcube.install: Updated directory paths. > * debian/changelog: Corrected file containing white space. > * debian/control: > + Added package assaultcube-data. > + Build-Depends: Libraries updated for SDL2. > + Bumped Standards-Version to 4.4.0. > - Changed from 'debhelper' to 'debhelper-compat' in > Build-Depends field and bumped level to 12. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#933248: RFS: assaultcube/1.2.0.2-1 [ITA] -- realistic first-person-shooter
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "assaultcube" * Package name: assaultcube Version : 1.2.0.2-1 Upstream Author : Rabid Viper Productions * URL : http://assault.cubers.net * License : GPL-2+ or Zlib Section : contrib/games It builds those binary packages: assaultcube - realistic first-person-shooter assaultcube-data - realistic first-person-shooter (data file) To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: https://mentors.debian.net/package/assaultcube Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/contrib/a/assaultcube/assaultcube_1.2.0.2-1.dsc More information about assaultcube can be obtained from https://gitlab.com/coringao/assaultcube. Changes since the last upload: assaultcube (1.2.0.2-1) unstable; urgency=medium * New upstream release (Closes: #726355, #727026, #779617) * Added files: + d/assaultcube.6 - Manpages used from previous version. + d/assaultcube.docs. + d/assaultcube-data.install. + d/assaultcube-data.links. + d/assaultcube-server.6 - Manpages used from previous version. + d/clean - Removing the bin_unix directory. + d/manpages. * Removed files (outdated): - d/assaultcube.dirs. - d/assaultcube.lintian-overrides. - d/assautcube.xpm. - d/autoreconf. - d/compat. - d/patches. - d/README.Debian. - d/README.source. * debian/assaultcube.desktop: Updated '.desktop' application shortcut file. * debian/assaultcube.install: Updated directory paths. * debian/changelog: Corrected file containing white space. * debian/control: + Added package assaultcube-data. + Build-Depends: Libraries updated for SDL2. + Bumped Standards-Version to 4.4.0. - Changed from 'debhelper' to 'debhelper-compat' in Build-Depends field and bumped level to 12. + Changed upstream Vcs-* URLs in salsa.d.g. (Closes: #900467) + Long description organized. * debian/copyright: + Copy made of original copyright on copyright-orig. + Organized copyright for each software license. + Format-uri: Changed unversioned copyright format uri. + Adding myself copyright in debian/*. * debian/rules: - Changed and removed get-orig-source and version checking. * debian/scripts: Updated executable scripts. * debian/upstream: Included metadata and signature key. * debian/watch: Changed to personal git mirrored in upstream git. Regards, Carlos Donizete Froes [a.k.a coringao]
