Re: opencpn_2.5.0+dfsg-1_i386.changes REJECTED
Anton Martchukov wrote:
> > Unfortunetaly license check only lists licenses of files in
> > the source tree (some of them are not properly detected
> > though, e.g. it did not detected WXWidgets license and
> > misdetected BSD-4-clause as BSD-3-clause). I did my best to
> > manually review the results of licensecheck against
> > the source files and checked DEP-5 copyright file
> > against the output of licensecheck (this check is currently
> > not automated).
> >
> > Still there are some unclear things left based on
> > licensecheck run, documented on [1].
> >
> > [1] http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f134/some-more-copyright-things-based-on-debian-inclusion-reject-77012.html
Francesco wrote:
> Again when ready with license reviewing please poke me for a
> new upload...
Hi,
I have re-run licensecheck on it and been through each file it
didn't have a clear answer to, adding to the debian/copyright
file where needed. I wanted to run it through fossology too, but
that was uninstalable on sid and wanted a full apache install
+ mods on my deb/stable workstation which I don't like to mess
with as I need it for work, so I skipped that -- barrier to entry
was too high.
I focused on documenting all files with unclear or missing copy-
right headers in the debian/copyright file rather than patching
in copyright headers in an aftermarket patch. Patching in copy-
right statements to someone else's file just seems wrong to me.
(Upstream has since added these in their git where missing or
incomplete, this is just to clean up the months-old stable
release tarball)
So AFAIK the OpenCPN packaging in DebianGIS svn (+ dfsg tarball
in DebianGIS alioth web space) is ready now, but for the new
lintian wanting hardening to be enabled by default and issuing a
couple warnings that it isn't turned on. I've patched it to
switch that on, but without lots of testing & feedback from
upstream I would not like to upload that new change just yet. Do
you think the ftpmasters would mind if we delayed switching that
on for a few weeks & issue a -2 pkg version with a minimal patch
to do that sometime later? I am concerned that after a year+ in
developing this package we are about to miss the freeze deadline.
So: if you think it's ok to try for upload even with the hardening
warning, please do it. If you think the hardening lintian warning
is mandatory pre-upload let me know and I'll check in the patch
tomorrow, and we'll just have to do lots of stability testing
of this during the freeze.
thanks,
Hamish
ps- there is a few days old new stable release version 3.0 out
now, but I think it is too close to the freeze to include that.
(aka reset the packaging effort and bug testing clock to zero
when the 2.5 effort is sitting at 98% ready and very well tested)
Reply to: