[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Ogre3d : Upstream paths have changed and the licensing has changed


On Wednesday 29 December 2010 11:22:32 shirish शिरीष wrote:
> Hi all,
>  I was looking at Ogre3d for an updated package of Ogre and found a
> few inconsistencies in the PTS . This is the overview of the package
> Ogre :-
> http://packages.qa.debian.org/o/ogre.html
> There is wrong or oudated information at two places.
> The watch URL for the package should be changed in
> http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/report.php?package=ogre from sf.net/ogre
> to the bitbucket.org mercurial repository.
> Please look at  http://dehs.alioth.debian.org/report.php?package=ogre
> and then at https://bitbucket.org/sinbad/ogre/. The subversion
> repository is no longer being maintained and it has been said there as
> well.

You are right, but this information is only updated when a new package is 
uploaded.  In other words, the information contained in the PTS and the rest 
of places is extracted from the last uploaded package.  So in this case the 
information is correct -- the repository was the svn one by the time the 
package it was uploaded, etc.

The case of the watch URL is similar: they changed from 1.6.4 to 1_7_1, so 
the change in the pattern makes the Debian watch mechanism go wrong.

> b. The copyright file. The copyright says LGPL while upstream changed
> licensing to a more permissive MIT License.
> Please look at
> http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/o/ogre/ogre_1.6.4.dfsg1-
> 1/copyright
> and then at
> https://bitbucket.org/sinbad/ogre/raw/3e9ed7c712e1/Docs/ChangeLog.html
> Go down quarter of a page and see :-
> v1.7.0 [Cthugha] (28 February 2010) - MAJOR RELEASE
> [View changes since RC1]
> License changes
> OGRE 1.7 is now released under the MIT License
> I could have filed bug but this is more better. Hoping to see a new
> release of the package atleast in experimental. If there are other
> dependency issues atleast point me to that so I know.

The explanation is again the same: the information about the license 
contained is about the last package uploaded to Debian.  So the information 
in the PTS is correct in that sense, the problem is that the package is 

Now, for your information and for the rest of the people in the mailing list 
which might not know: I created the package 1.7.1 and uploaded it 2 months 
and a half ago, as NMU/overtake of the package.  This was like 8 months 
later than 1.7.0 was released, and after several petitions to package the 
new version, including mine:


Of course, mid october was relatively late in the freeze process so it won't 
get into the next stable.  But it also didn't get approved for unstable 
because FTP-masters don't want to consider it for some reason (probably 
because they don't care for package that won't go into stable).

So in 2/3 months, after freeze is over and the queue processed, you can have 
1.7.1 in Debian with all of that information that you mentioned updated.  
The only problem being that 1.7.2 is already out for a while and probably 
1.7.3 will come in between.  But that's the Debian way.

I can provide you the source package in the meantime, if you are interested.

Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>

Reply to: