On 24.02.2014 09:56, Paul Wise wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:41 PM, Markus Koschany wrote: > >> What is source in regard to artwork? > > For Debian purposes, I would argue that if Debian users have access to > the same artefacts as upstream then DFSG item 2 is satisfied and the > package should be in main/contrib. Unfortunately it is never anywhere > near that simple. I agree. [...] I skip the examples about the missing sources for software and I agree with all of them. > The most recent warzone2100 tarball is a GPL violation because they > ship generated lexers/parsers (C code) but not the bison/flex source > for them. That might be a separate thread. Did anyone try to discuss this with upstream? How can the issue be resolved? > Hedgewars includes raster images rendered from vector images and > multilayer raster images. These are included in the upstream VCS but > not in the tarball. I think one argument against having everything in the release tarball is size. Complex games with a lot of art assets tend to ship a lot of art assets that can occupy precious storage space and bandwidth. Personally I wouldn't mind to mirror this data or upload a second tarball with additional source files. However I think we should find a balance between providing every source file that upstream provides and not overworking Debian's infrastructure. I find it reasonable to mention the additional sources in README.source and link to the upstream VCS because everything is just a click away and in reach for the user. > The Naev project put pre-rendered images in their main VCS repository. > The actual source is in a pair of separate repositories on separate > hosting, one is a hard-to-find git repository associated with the > Vegastrike project. The source is actually multilayer raster images > (XCF), vector images (SVG, XaraLX), 3D models (Blender) and some > shell, make and Python to render these to images. The rendering > happens rarely and isn't possible with entirely free software due to > one of the files being XaraLX format. There was a second XaraLX file > that I converted to SVG but I haven't had the time to fix the other > one yet. I saw that Vincent did some work on the package a few years ago and it appears there hasn't been any progress on #523834 for a long time. Wouldn't it be possible to drop or replace the non-free XaraLX file and find a pragmatic solution? Is there no better and faster way to get a version of Naev into Debian? I think as long as the resulting image is freely licensed and in a modifiable form and the rest of Naev is also free software, we should find a compromise to allow users to enjoy the game, to work with the sources and to give them a chance to resolve the remaining issues. I think that's what DFSG 4 reminds us to do. Trying to solve this issue alone will probably take far too long. > The original developers of warzone2100 released only pre-rendered > video for their intro sequences and mission briefing sequences. As a > result the current developers are unable to render high-resolution > video for them or fix the textures or anything else. Sadly they also > seem to be making the same mistakes in their choices. Agreed but you can't hope for educating all upstream developers. You can take a radical stance and stop shipping warzone2100 or you can find a compromise or simply let the user decide. [...] > The source for beneath-a-steel-sky and similar point-and-click > adventures were "lost" a long time ago and are not meaningfully > modifiable so various glitches cannot be fixed. I suppose most users are quite happy to play the game just as it appears with all its glitches and shortcomings which wouldn't be possible without ScummVM. I think the benefits outweigh the disadvantages by far and nobody prevents anybody from writing an editor. I don't like it either but there is simply nothing better that can be called source. BASS's README.Debian explains this a lot better. Regards, Markus
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature