Re: brain party: DFSG-package
Hi Markus,
Happy New Year. All the best to you and to the games team.
On Sun, 30 Dec 2012 00:02:22 Markus Koschany wrote:
> > OK, although I doubt this remark carry any useful information.
> > (would you install the game only because it has >NNN images?)
>
> I usually split the description of data packages in two paragraphs. The
> first one repeats the most important part of the game description. (To
> which game does the data package belong?) The second part is about the
> content. In this case it is remarkable that this collection of minigames
> ships more than 400 free images and sounds which someone could use in
> another project. So i wouldn't just install the game because of the huge
> number of images but would probably pick this _data_ package if i
> searched for free images and sounds.
I see, it makes sense. Perhaps that's why you've changed "Recommends:
brainparty" to "Suggests: brainparty" in brainparty-data.
Very good.
> Suggestions how to improve the second
> paragraph?
Hmm, not sure, it appears to be good enough for a moment. :)
> >
> > Very nice Thanks.
> > Nowever it should be done in get-orig-source so ChangeLog would be
> > shipped as part of DFSG-repackaged orig.tar.
>
> Extracting the changelog from the README file is a rather pedantic
> issue. It's just to show how i would do it. I also think an override
> section in debian/rules is the right place because it's a Debian
> specific issue which can be solved easily during build time. But
> personally i can live without an additional changelog and just the
> README. On the other hand i happily volunteer for keeping this little
> snippet up to date for future upstream releases. :)
No worries. :)
>
> > > I've added one missing copyright holder and myself to copyrights.
> >
> > Sorry, I wouldn't be so sure about missing copyright holder.
> > Indeed Scott Ewart that you added as copyright holder is listed in
> > CREDITS file however there is nothing to suggest that he holds copyright
> > for any particular file. Moreover, you've totally made up the copyright
> > year. I think we should have a solid foundation for copyright
> > information and inventing copyright years doesn't seems like right thing
> > to do IMHO.
> >
> > There is nowhere in upstream files I could find a proper copyright
> > statement claiming copyright for Scott Ewart's work.
>
> Interesting. My reasoning is Scott Ewart is credited with making some
> (all?) of the game's art in the CREDITS file and ingame. So he made a
> contribution to the game which is licensed under GPL-3+ hence i think he
> should be mentioned in Debian's copyright file. Then the logical
> consequence would be that the copyright year must be 2010 because all
> upstream releases were in this year. But if you disagree i suggest
> writing an e-mail to Paul Hudson and getting a clarification from his
> side.
I think we're making too many assumptions:
Copyright year for images is not clear. I might be quite probable that some of
~400 images could be published earlier.
As far as I understand to claim copyright we need a copyright statement
including year, word "copyright", name and probably the scope of copyright.
Among all of those we can be sure only about name. I'd say the copyright claim
would be invalid.
Interestingly Paul Hudson (upstream) mention Scott Ewart only in CREDITS (not
COPYRIGHT(!) which makes me wonder what kind of contribution Scott Ewart has
provided. He could be co-author of some images but also he could influence or
inspire the author, financially support making the artwork, making pencil
sketches or helping to learn graphics editing software.
To push this idea even further I could give credits to my family for all my
work in Debian: countless number of times they were cleaning, cooking,
shopping and going out without me while I had all the fun with packaging and
bug fixing. Truly without their help I would hardly be able to contribute but
it doesn't make them copyright holders if you know what I mean.
I'll email upstream to clarify just to be sure.
>
> > The game have another problem though. Before looking for sponsor could
> > you please have a look (if you have required skills) why game is using
> > so much CPU when idle? It's probably a bug which would be nice to fix
> > before upload.
>
> I see you are referring to this launchpad bug report. [1]
No-no I'm not. I wasn't aware of such report. :)
> I haven't even
> realized this bug until you have mentioned it. Well, it's hardly
> noticeable on my three year old core duo here but it might be a small issue
> on a smartphone or tablet pc. I suggest to contact the upstream developer.
> Maybe he has some advice or even a patch. But i don't think that this
> should delay the search for a sponsor.
Actually I've noticed the problem on some of my computers as well as on N900
("smartphone"). Maybe my hardware is older or I'm more sensitive to this but
certainly it is a problem but not big enough to delay uploading.
However it'll be only matter of time until this issue will be reported as bug.
I'm going to write to upstream anyway as we have few patches to forward so
I'll ask about copyright and CPU usage.
> > Also Markus, please forgive my ranting but I've noticed you converted
> > repository to git-buildpackage layout and merged upstream source and
> > media content with packaging. This is the only thing that I don't like
> > about your changes.
>
> [...]
>
> You are calling this a rant? That was more like a warm summer breeze. :P
:) Thank you. :)
>
> To make it short, you have put all the work in the initial release and i
> have no problem to adopt to your personal packaging preferences. I
> personally feel more comfortable with git and git-buildpackage but i'm
> not wedded with these tools.
Good, thanks. :)
>
> However i think keeping the upstream sources and media files in a public
> git repository is a good thing IMO. Imagine upstream vanishes and we
> loose the possibility to download the sources from launchpad.
> Therefore i think it is always a good idea to save them on a Debian
> server in addition to the usual Debian package in the archive. In this
> case the media files are a valuable asset and it's a good thing to keep
> them safe and secure.
It seems unnecessary to mirror upstream sources in anticipation of their
disappearance whatever the likelihood of that. Hopefully soon enough we will
have the package available from Debian mirrors.
> > Any chance you consider dropping upstream files from packaging please?
>
> If you insist, it will take just a few seconds to revert the changes and to
> delete the upstream and pristine-tar branches. Please let me know how
> you'd like me to proceed.
Thank you, maybe we'll do it later.
> Btw can you remove the package at mentors so
> i can later upload the new package?
Sure, I didn't know you can't upload while my package is still there. Did you
try? It is now removed.
> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/brainparty/+bug/802048
--
Cheers,
Dmitry.
Reply to: