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

Re: OSSIM packaging (Was: OTB)



Hello Bas,

Is the source archive okay to be packaged?

I am thinking to start this but if there are still issues with license, I prefer not..

On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Rashad Kanavath <mohammedrashadkm@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Bas,

No no patches for fixing copyright.  I got a new patch release from ossim 1.8.20-2

http://download.osgeo.org/ossim/source/ossim-1.8.20/ossim-1.8.20-2.tar.gz

Would it help?

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Rashad Kanavath <mohammedrashadkm@gmail.com> wrote:


On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebastic@xs4all.nl> wrote:
On 14-12-15 11:37, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebastic@xs4all.nl>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14-12-15 10:47, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Sebastiaan Couwenberg wrote:
>>>> On 14-12-15 09:19, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
>>>>> There are issue with embedded sources inside ossim
>>>>>
>>>>> GeoTrans
>>>>> shapelib
>>>>> matrix lib
>>>>>
>>>>> But in the debian/copyright file, I found notes explaining these stuff.
>>>>>
>>>>
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-grass/ossim.git/tree/debian/copyright#n171
>>>>
>>>> What are the issues with these embedded sources?
>>>>
>>>> shapelib is packaged, but the others are not. As long as their licensing
>>>> is not problematic, they don't have to be excluded from a repacked
>>>> upstream tarball.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Okay. This was a mistake on my side of being not clear. I was saying
>>> embedded sources are not a good idea. I consider this an "issue". I have
>>> asked them to allow use external geotrans instead of embedded sources.
>>>
>>> https://packages.debian.org/sid/utils/geotranz
>>
>> Embedded copies are an issue in general, but the severity depends on
>> whether the code has license issues and if the Debian package is
>> actually usable instead of the embedded copy.
>>
>> Rule of thumb: Using embedded copies for building the Debian package is
>> strongly discouraged, if we have the software packaged that should be
>> used instead. If the embedded code has license issues, it must be
>> excluded from the repacked upstream tarball.
>>
>> The geotranz hasn't been updated since 2014-01-05, and seemingly only
>> because it was NMUed before. We should talk to the maintainer about
>> moving the package to the Debian GIS team where it can benefit from team
>> maintenance.
>>
>
> for ossim-1.8.20, I think we can stick to internal copy. the work on moving
> geotrans is not completed.
>
> It started at the end of 1.8.20 release. Also if geotranz needs to be moved
> to debiangis, I will stick to embedded sources.
>
> one more question regarding the inconsistency of licenses..
>
> I can add an issue on bugtracker with a patch and then later include in
> debian sources
>
> would it help ?

If you don't wait for the fixed upstream release, the patch needs to be
included in the Debian package at least too. FTP master may not be happy
that the license view differs significantly between patches-applied and
not. I'm not happy with that for license & copyright review either.

Okay. then forget it. We wait for next ossim release.
 
Is there an issue in the OSSIM tracker about the license inconsistency
already?

Not yet. I was going to add one if that helps with packaging. But from what you said it is better to wait for next release.
 
Kind Regards,

Bas

--
 GPG Key ID: 4096R/6750F10AE88D4AF1
Fingerprint: 8182 DE41 7056 408D 6146  50D1 6750 F10A E88D 4AF1




--
Regards,
   Rashad



--
Regards,
   Rashad



--
Regards,
   Rashad

Reply to: