|Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account||2019-02-17 14:43 UTC|
|My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap | Site Issue Support Ranking | Rules | My Account|
|View Issue Details|
|ID||Project||Category||View Status||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0003604||Site||[All Projects] Bug||public||2019-02-07 14:27||2019-02-11 15:08|
|Summary||0003604: debian.drdteam.org doesn't publish source packages|
|Description||DRD Team Debian Package Repository publishes binaries to various programs, but not sources. I find the repository useful, but would like to fetch the sources from there too (mainly for the convenience of apt(8), secondarily for legal reasons).|
SLADE3 seems to have a GNU General Public License v2 file athttps://github.com/sirjuddington/SLADE/blob/master/gpl-2.0.txt [^] , which would imply the source must (or should) be provided under the license. The author has also clarified things to be GPLv2 (see below).
Doomseeker has new contributors under LGPLv2.1+, such as me and Pol M.
Other packages I didn't look into, but there could be more issues. Would be nice to get this eventually fixed.
|Steps To Reproduce|
Quote from http://debian.drdteam.org/
|Additional Information||I've been aware of this issue for a very long time now, but didn't report the issue for my own ignorance.|
QuoteFrom: Simon Judd <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2017 10:13:12 +0930 Message-ID: <CAKiCvjq1O0m_k=VRzWpJ_FKaPFbdq=insm3y7LidUHS1Chehgg@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Packaging SLADE for Debian GNU/Linux To: Wub TheCaptain <email@example.com> Hmm yeah I'm not sure what exactly would be required for this, though all source files in src/ excluding src/External/ are GPLv2. On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 4:56 AM, Wub TheCaptain <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > I'd like to package SLADE for Debian GNU/Linux and meet their > standards & policies  for .deb packaging with source code for > inclusion. I'm in process of packaging Doomseeker at the moment,  > but would like to package SLADE eventually. > > Before going any further, I wanted to see if packaging SLADE and > inclusion in Debian GNU/Linux is currently possible. I ran > "licensecheck --recursive ." in the 184.108.40.206 tag of Git source to check > the project's licensing status (see attached licensecheck.log). > > This license check unfortunately found many source files without > copyright notice and/or no statements what's permitted. There is a way > to exclude non-free files from a Debian package distribution, but I > have a feeling many of those files (among few false positives) are > essential to SLADE's features. > > Would you be interested in making contributions for SLADE's inclusion > in Debian GNU/Linux's package archives? If so, I can let you know of > other issues I may run into while packaging SLADE. > > Thanks in advance. > > :https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ [^] > :https://zandronum.com/tracker/view.php?id=3246 [^] > > -- > OpenPGP: 496B 08C3 1B71 75B1 F9CF 4646 AC3D EEA2 3DFB F4C8 >https://wubthecaptain.eu/wubthecaptain.asc [^] >
Would adding a more clear explanation of why the sources are not provided there be suitable?
Besides Doomseeker as of 1.2, all of the packages on there are generated by hand (I'm sure you can tell based on various mistakes). I can't really provide a source deb since they never existed in the first place. And even with Doomseeker those are made by CPack so there's not a source deb in between.
All sources are unmodified except occasionally I have to trivially modify the build system scripts to force a static library in or something like that. Most of the time gnarly environment variables/CMake settings get the job done though. We're talking trivial to the point with a lot more effort I probably could get the job done by hacking the find modules to do my bidding avoiding the licensing issue altogether.
I'm not hiding anything, I'm just not uploading that which does not exist, and not spending time generating something of limited utility to my target audience (those who don't want to compile). Your not the only one to ask about Slade, but I swear the only trick is getting all the third party dependencies lined up (and in my case as static libraries).
I'm all up for volunteering to create Debian source packages sometime (that is the end-goal) and providing one-to-one guidance on Debian packaging to come up with a resolution to this (even if it will not yet reach standards of Debian's policy).
Quote from Blzut3
For GPL'd sources (copyleft), I don't think so. It must be the complete corresponding source with install instructions to build the exact binary, IIRC. GPLv3 is a bit more tolerant with ways to do it (over a network connection).
For non-GPL'd sources (non-copyleft), maybe. Some licenses like ISC, Expat, BSD-3-clause have a need to reproduce the conditions some way. If binaries already install the license file somewhere or have it shown somewhere in the binary, ok?
A temporary fix is to offer the GPL-licensed source in writing; that works until someone asks you for a copy and then someone may be forced to do the effort anyway. This source offer is not available yet.
Quote from Blzut3
I never used that system, for this reason and my lack of knowledge of using it. 0003246 is also all done by hand with handwritten debian/* files (with the help of dh_make).
Quote from Blzut3
Just making sure you know, these can be done from the debian/rules file without modifying the original source.
|Only registered users can voice their support. Click here to register, or here to log in.|
|Supporters:||No one explicitly supports this issue yet.|
|Opponents:||No one explicitly opposes this issue yet.|
|2019-02-07 14:27||WubTheCaptain||New Issue|
|2019-02-08 02:40||Blzut3||Note Added: 0020353|
|2019-02-08 02:40||Blzut3||Assigned To||=> Blzut3|
|2019-02-08 02:40||Blzut3||Status||new => feedback|
|2019-02-11 15:08||WubTheCaptain||Note Added: 0020367|
|2019-02-11 15:08||WubTheCaptain||Status||feedback => assigned|
Questions or other issues? Contact Us.
|Copyright © 2000 - 2019 MantisBT Team|