On 20.02.2014 17:04, Simon McVittie wrote: [...] > I had read redeclipse's debian/copyright as saying that its maintainer > knows (or at least strongly believes) that a preferred form for > modification exists, and that it is not included. If I'm wrong about > that, and we are in fact distributing the most modifiable form that > the project is aware of, it might well be OK for main. Ask the > maintainer and the ftpmasters? Yup, that's what I'm doing right now. The maintainer of Red Eclipse is the Debian Games Team. > If the maintainer does know about a preferred form for modification > that is not distributed in Debian, the fact that redeclipse is under > CC-BY-SA (as opposed to OA's GPL) means we are not required by the > copyright license to ship the *preferred* form for modification, only > *some* modifiable form. However, I'm under the impression that the > DFSG as interpreted by the ftpmasters (which is the interpretation > that matters when deciding what can go in main) does specifically > require the preferred form for modification. [...] > If you believe that modifiable but non-preferred-form files should be > allowed in main, then the proposers of that GR agreed with you, and > the people to convince are the ftpmasters and the project as a whole, > not me or the games team. The reason why I'm discussing this issue on debian-devel-games is due to the fact that this package is team-maintained by us. I think the correct approach would be to discuss such specific issues always here on this list, to get all members involved in the discussion and then come to a conclusion. Whereas the wrong approach would be to start a thread on debian-devel before talking to the people who are directly affected by the outcome of this proposal. Another reason is my understanding of the current situation. I believe this is not an ftpmaster issue because they have already accepted a lot of similar packages in main, data that is mostly licensed under CC-BY-SA. If a package like FreeOrion is accepted in main, Red Eclipse should be there, too. As you have already acknowledged yourself in this thread, it is nearly impossible to know whether data files such as images are the preferred form of modification. I also think this term is rather well understood in the case of software but is often the subject of interpretation issues when it comes to artwork. The ftpmasters seem to be aware of this controversy and grant us a margin of discretion in regard to artwork and the preferred form of modification question. I allege that the developers of Red Eclipse don't retain higher quality artwork deliberately and that they share everything according to their license agreement. I also allege that Martin, the uploader of Red Eclipse, would continue to maintain Red Eclipse in main but could not do so before due to uncertainties in regard to the interpretation of "the preferred form of modification" clause and the inconsistent application of those rules in this team. I therefore ask all team members to voice their opinion and to support my proposal to move Red Eclipse to the main section of the Debian archive, since it consists of DFSG free software and artwork. Regards, Markus
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature