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

Re: generated source files, GPL and DFSG

On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 16:52:23 +0200 Bas Wijnen wrote:

> Hello,

Hi!  :)

> Some background about all this:
> First of all, GFingerPoken is released under the GPL.
> However, when I found that (some of) the graphics had a source from
> which they could be compiled, I concluded two things:
> - To satisfy the GPL, the source for those graphics needs to be
> distributed as
>   well, so it must be in the source package.


> - I don't know if it's actually written anywhere, but I thought
> everything
>   that has source and can be compiled should be compiled at package
>   build time.  This means the .h-files have to be regenerated (with
>   pov-ray, in this case).

I think so (IANADD).

> Now that's where the problem starts: pov-ray is in non-free, so any
> package with a Build-depends: on it must be in contrib (if it is
> itself free).


> I don't like to have non-free software on my machine,
> so I didn't like that idea.  I thought of two solutions for that:
> create new artwork,

That is an option.

> or do some editing on the existing artwork, which
> cannot be done automatically.  The latter would make it technically
> impossible to generate the result from source, which would probably
> remove the requirement to do so.  However, that just felt too much
> like going against the gist of the policy, so I chose not to do that.

If you actually modify the images directly in XPM format, you
effectively change the form of their source code. After your
modifications, the preferred form for further modifications is the xpm
The situation is similar to a case where you get a GPL'd program written
in Fortran77, translate it in C and *then* make modifications to it. The
source form is changed, but the GPL allows this.

Keep in mind that you actually have to do real modifications to the
images, not fake ones just to fool the license...
Basically you show that XPM is your preferred form for making
modifications, by actually making modifications in that format.

> > Now, since my game is GPLed, you can replace the artwork.  Maybe
> > I'll like it more.  But to claim that the original game does not
> > meet DFSG is bogus.

Actually what you seem to claim is not that the original game does not
meet the DFSG.
That would be false.
What you seem to have stated is:
* The original game /is/ Free and passes the DFSG.
* It's just not suitable for main, because it build-depends on a
  component that's not in main.
* Thus it belongs in contrib.
And this sounds true.

> Can GFingerPoken be in main with
> the original artwork, or not?

As I said above, IMHO, the answer is no.
It belongs in contrib, unless some changes are made (e.g. replacing the

    :-(   This Universe is buggy! Where's the Creator's BTS?   ;-)
  Francesco Poli                             GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpwNwVNyyBxg.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: