Hi Markus, > I had a look at your package and there are some issues that have to be > clarified before it can be uploaded. > > First of all in this case I don't mind that you have created a fork of > the game and cleaned up the code base because the original code was > developed in 2003 and doesn't look maintained anymore. However there was > the port to SDL in 2010 and finally to SDL2 by other contributors and I > wonder why you didn't just base your packaging on this version: > > https://github.com/danilolc/pk2 It was based on the original source code of the upstream, was not copied by other contributors but was inspired by the idea of upgrading to SDL2 for GNU/Linux based distributions. But even so, I did not fail to mention the authors. > There was recent activity only a month ago and maybe the author is > interested in incorporating all your changes? The purpose of this project is to work only for distributions based on GNU/Linux, leaving the source code as clean as possible. > It is unfortunate that the level editor was removed. Could you explain > why this was necessary? The level editor is a separate add-on that will work on QT5 for future releases. > My greatest concern is the current licensing though. The original > license is in src/license.txt > > "This package contains the source codes for the game Pekka Kana 2, > written by Janne Kivilahti. > The game and it's (sic) code are copyrighted by Janne Kivilahti, but you > can modify and use the code freely > as long as the original author is mentioned." > > > This should be the main license in debian/copyright that covers all the > code. You can't just claim that all code is licensed under BSD-2-clause > although the licenses show some similarities. Of course you can claim > copyright for the debian directory or the manpage and desktop file which > you wrote yourself. But you can claim copyright only for work that > surpasses a certain threshold of originality and I'm not sure if this is > true for all the original source files which you modified in part. I understood, I will make a new version of the project, removing these licenses in the source codes. > I think pk2 is too short for a binary package name. At least this name > wouldn't ring a bell for me. Could be anything. What about renaming the > package simply to pekkakana2? You're absolutely right, I changed the name to "pekka-kana-2". > pk2 depends on g++. That should not be necessary. Sorry, I added it for some reason when I was compiling into armel architecture. I'll be removing it from d/control. Thanks! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Carlos Donizete Froes [a.k.a coringao] ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Debian Wiki: https://wiki.debian.org/coringao ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ GPG: 4096R/B638B780 ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀ 2157 630B D441 A775 BEFF D35F FA63 ADA6 B638 B780
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part