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

Re: Lxdoom, ability to package, copyright



On Sun, Sep 05, 1999 at 11:58:03PM -0400, Joe Drew wrote:
> I'm interested in packaging (as my first package!) Lxdoom. 
> However, it is a non-free package - I'm not so concerned about
> that, it's only a game - and what's more, it depends on the
> registered .wad files of Doom, Doom 2, or another id game.
> Is it allowable to include lxdoom in Debian? I note that
> the Policy manual does allow 'contrib' to depend on packages
> which aren't in Debian at all. Can this be done?

The problem with lxdoom (Joey Hess had it in Debian at one point) is that
the license on the original xdoom source is so non-free it's not
distributable.  Granted, this is not what John Carmack intended, but it's
what has happened.  When this was discovered we had to pull it.

NONE of the doom ports can be packaged until such time as the issues are
resolved WRT the original xdoom source license.  If that happens it's
perfectly acceptable to put doom in contrib or if you can come up with a
free iwad (new textures, new levels, new sounds, new everything) you could
actually put it in main.  There exist free textures and sounds, even free
levels.  But it'd take a lot of time to put them together (IMO would be
worthwhile if I had time.)

Still, it all comes back to the license iD has given us, which makes every
single doom port out there a Copyright violation.  =<  If you can convince
the people at iD to notice you long enough to get them to fix it, all
would be nifty---you can package lxdoom and I'll package lindosdoom.  =>

-- 
Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org>             Debian GNU/Linux developer
GnuPG: 2048g/3F9C2A43 - 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC  44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3
PGP 2.6: 2048R/50BDA0ED - E8 D6 84 81 E3 A8 BB 77  8E E2 29 96 C9 44 5F BE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* lilo hereby declares OPN a virtual pain in the ass :)

Attachment: pgpCs3fPchsWH.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: