Re: How to proceed with EMBOSS packaging (Was: About having EMBOSS 6.4.0 in Wheezy or not.)
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 05:19:53PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 09:59:01AM +0200, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> >
> > I agree that hiding this problem via lintian-overrides probably is not
> > the best solution. However, on the other hand, the overrides file
> > provides a nice way to document exactly what you wrote above.
>
> Good point, go ahead !
The funny thing is that this was just inside emboss-lib.lintian-overrides
and only the error string from lintian changed a bit. :-)
> > 1. Moving the complete EMBOSS suite to non-free
> > 2. Creating a 6.4.0~dfsg tarball by dropping the complete jemboss
> > dir and in addition having a jemboss-6.4.0 source package which
> > should be moved to non-free as a first quick shot. Then we
> > could sort out the jar dependencies step by step
>
> After spending a lot of time on clarifying the license of the test suite files,
> I would be very ashamed to report that it wasted everybody's time because
> EMBOSS has anyway to go to non-free.
Huh??? As far as I followed the mail exchange regarding this the issue
was clarified and settled. Is there any news which I might have missed?
> Not to mention that moving EMBOSS to
> non-free was one of my propositions at that time.
Neither it was mine and it would be a shame to miss it in main.
> I admit that when I started to package EMBOSS, I did not understand that .class
> files (what a misleading name) are not source code.
>
> The best is to work it out with Upstream, in the course of packaging version
> 6.5.0 or 6.6.0, as the situation with 6.4.0 is not a regression. To my
> knowledge, none of these jars are non-free software, and for the one that is
> specific to EMBOSS, the source is provided.
I confirm that the software which is bundled inside the JAR files is
free in principle - just without source. We have some duplicated
libraries which should be replaced by Debian's own ones. But this is
more work than we can manage in June.
So the question remains: What exactly is the reason for the change of
the situation with the test suite files and is it worth to split up the
Java stuff to non-free?
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: