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

Re: Version to use in package for a program with non standard versioning



On Friday 30 December 2005 2:40 pm, you wrote:
> > You have sorted out the licence problems with qd? It's currently in
> > contrib.
>
> What license problem whould that be?

I'm not claiming to have an authoritative answer for all this, I'm not a DD 
yet.

> Dick Howell, the original author, explicitly says on his website:
> "This is free software; you can distribute it and/or modify it under the
> terms of the GNU Public License.  There is no warranty.  If it breaks, as
> they say, you get to keep the pieces."
> http://linuxminded.xs4all.nl/mirror/www.boston.quik.com/rph/fah.html

Why is it in contrib then? Just curious really.

> I think that the problem could be that in the kfolding source there was no
> mention of the qd license, but Dick Howell released all his tools under
> the GPL, so I don't think that would be a problem. Or am I not aware of
> something?

I would advise that you check - qd/kfolding will not have gone into contrib 
without good reason. Check with the kfolding maintainer.

From the copyright:
Kfolding Copyright Holder 2003-2005: Kevin Hessels <khessels@shaw.ca>
 with the following exceptions:
 src/unitinfodialog/kfoldingmoleculewidget.cpp 2002, 2003 Richard P. Howell IV
 src/unitinfodialog/kfoldingmoleculewidget.h   2002, 2003 Richard P. Howell IV

Qd Copyright Holder 2002-2005: Richard P. Howell IV <rph@boston.quik.com>

> As I said, one time there are a few updates in one week, sometimes even
> multiple updates on one day, although those are rare. Usually there are
> one or two updates in one month, other times there are no update for a
> whole month or more.

Is there really any point in incrementing the version that often? Are the 
upgrades incompatible in any way? I don't know any Debian packages that need 
to change this often. It can take several days for a release to propagate 
through the various uploading systems, especially new binaries. Personally, 
I'd expect a monthly release at most and if users need updates in between, 
they'll have to be downloaded separately. Don't know how easy that would be 
to configure though.
:-(

> > Depends how much qd has changed since it was last uploaded as part of
> > kfolding. 1.1.0-1 may be suitable.
>
> Not much has changed, there have been 3 updates to qd by Dick Howell since
> the version which is in Debian. Mostly tiny bugfixes, but a few features
> have been added since then too. The Operating System in the queue.dat can
> now be decoded, and a different output format is now also available.
> I've also fixed a 3 bugs since Dick Howells last release.

1.1.0 may be more suitable then.

The 1.0.0 version on the existing Debian package is important because unless 
you increment from that point, apt may not replace the old package with the 
new.

-- 

Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

Attachment: pgpuUhaljZ1YP.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: