Le lundi 19 mars 2012 02:17:05, vous avez écrit :
>
> By the definition in the GPL (in GPLv3 §1, “the preferred form of the
> work for making modifications to it”), every work of software has a
> source form. So digital images are no exception.
Totally agree.
>
> If the preferred form of a software work is the same as the one used
> directly by programs for displaying the image, then that doesn't change
> the fact that it's the source form of the work.
Agree again but I have one question. Maybe the answer is obvious but who is to
decide what is the preferred form? Is it supposed to be the preferred form for
the author. If it's the user then it gets a bit complicated because it could
vary from one user to another.
If it is the developer, then the answer is simple. I never looked if there was
any SVG. The images which were created were based on the png he got in the
icon pack. However for the image he just included, the preferred form is SVG.
>
> > From there, I have a few questions:
> >
> > * Should I include the SVG source in the package for the images he
> > didn't modify?
>
> Whether he actually did modify them, a judgement needs to be made: for
> the software work that actually ends up in the binary package, what is
> the preferred form of that software (in this case, a graphic image file)
> for making modifications to it?
If I were to decide the SVG would be the preferred form, even for image which
were modified from the png. If you want to modify the text on an image for
instance, it is much easier to do a sed on the SVG and the reapply whatever
transformation the author did.
However opinions could diverge here and I think "preferred form" is not about
a taste but about an absolute truth. I understand it as "what is the easiest
way to make modification".
>
> If that's the SVG file, that's the source; if that's the PNG file,
> that's the source.
I would say the SVG is the preferred form, even if upstream author didn't use
it. It's also the safest path as pointed out Simon McVittie. I will thus
include the svg in addition of the png for the non modified files. I suspect the
size increase should be quite minimal anyway.
>
> > * What about the image he modified?
>
> The source you need to include is the corresponding source form of the
> software. That is, the form of the software which a recipient can use to
> have exactly the same software, and make further modifications.
Ok, definitely png then.
>
> That doesn't change simply because this work of software happens to be
> used as a graphic image.
>
> > => My opinion is that since he based is work on the png, only the png
> > need to be provided but I prefer to be safe than sorry, hence this
> > question.
>
> I'm not clear on what software you have. But if you think of it in terms
> of “what is the source form of this software?” by the GPL definition,
> that would be informative, I think.
>
> > * Some of the files with a SVG source come from KDE icon theme already
> > packaged in the archive. Can I just add a comment in debian/copyright
> > to say the SVG are in package X or do I have to copy the SVG in my own
> > package?
>
> Each package in Debian must have the full source for that package in
> Debian.
>
> By “come from”, do you mean the exact corresponding source is already in
> another package? That would make it likely the “object form” (in GPL
> terminology) is also the same as that other software. Does your package
> declare a dependnecy on that other package?
The icon in my package is the same as the icon in oxygen-icon-theme so yes
they have the same source. I think it's better to include the source file, a
dependency seems to me overkill.
>
> If by “come from” you mean “derived from” in the copyright sense of a
> creative transformation, then the original is no longer the
> corresponding source. You would need to include the corresponding source
> for this modified form, so a recipient has that source form if they want
> to make further modifications.
Ok and as Simon McVittie said, declaring whatever dependency would maintain
this version of the package in the archive even if my package is the only
user. I will thus copy the SVG in the source package.
>
> > => Since Debian distribute the source for both package X (the KDE icon
> > theme) and my package, I'd say the image are correctly acompanied with
> > the source (both are in Debian archive) as per GPL-2 3.a) or GPL-3 6.d
> > ("If the place to copy the object code is a network server, the
> > Corresponding Source may be on a different server").
>
> Only if it truly is the corresponding source form of *this particular*
> software, including all modifications. If there are modifications from
> the other package, then that package's source is no longer the
> corresponding source form for this software.
>
> > Thanks for taking the time to read thus far. I'm waiting your answer
> > to enlighten me as to what I should do to respect all the license and
> > DFSG requirements.
>
> Thank you for taking the time to treat this issue seriously.
Thanks both of you to reply me so quickly.
So what I'm going to do is include the SVG for all the icons which stayed
unmodified. For the modified image the source is the png image themselves.
Anyway, even if the source was the SVG of the image they are based on, they
will be present because of the unmodified images. I will prefer inclusion over
dependency to make sure whatever happen to the oxygen-icon-theme, the source
for the image will still be in the archive. Also, this allow all the sources
to be in the source package.
Best regards,
Thomas Preud'homme
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.