On Wed, 19. Feb 17:47 Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> wrote: [...] > > It is still not clear to me why we make an exception for this game > > and put it in contrib > > The answer appears to be "because it depends on redeclipse-data, which > is in non-free"; and according to its copyright file, the answer to > the obvious next question is "because redeclipse-data is all under > Free licenses, but is not the preferred form for modification, and > nobody has wanted to put in the effort to track down the corresponding > preferred forms for modification". So it fails the first half of DFSG > §2 but not the second - the opposite of some other packages in > non-free, which come with source code but are under a non-commercial > license or something. > > Having spent quite a while trying to correlate "source" files in > OpenArena svn with the manually-converted derived files that are all > they actually release, I can sympathise... I asked Martin to put this disclaimer into redeclipse-data one year ago because it was not clear why the package was in non-free back then. However I think the -data package ended up incorrectly in non-free because the DFSG was misinterpreted. Unfortunately this specific rule appears to be applied inconsistently across all games in Debian's archive. I will take up this issue in my next e-mail. [...] > I still don't really see why deb-src [...] contrib (deb [...] contrib > isn't needed!) is problematic for studying the source code of a Free > thing; everything in contrib is Free, it just doesn't (yet?) work > without non-Free things. I still need to enable contrib even for the sources, right? Contrib is not part of Debian. Packages in contrib don't get any security support. A lot of people don't care for packages in contrib or non-free at all. That is the reason why I want all free software in main. If it is free, it should be acknowledged by all community contributors. It is also more likely that someone, who wouldn't care about games in general, will try to fix one, if it is in main. > > I'm currently thinking that I might be able to find some other > > free maps/images/content for this package and documentation too in > > the future. Perhaps cube2-wake6, cube2-tutorials or cube2-docs > > would then be more appropriate? > > If you intend to add more later, something like cube2-data or > cube2-content? Or if you intend to defer dealing with that until you > get to it, cube2-wake6 seems reasonable. > > -docs seems odd for a package that is not primarily documentation; > -tutorials seems odd if its primary purpose isn't to be a tutorial. I guess cube2-data would be a good name. Thanks. Markus
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature