Re: purging upstream source tarball, or not?
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 9:54 AM, Paul Wise <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> 2010/7/17 Sébastien Barthélemy <email@example.com>:
>> Besides collada-dom, the upstream svn and tarballs include several
>> related programs, which I do not plan to build. They are either
>> - dependancies (such as pcre) which are already packaged separately in
> Please ask upstream to remove embedded code copies from their SVN and
> tarballs. If they refuse to do so
The project is quite inactive, I don't think they'll bother to make a
new release. But, I'll file a bug.
> it is a good idea to remove them in the initial phase of debian/rules build
> before a compiler is involved so that there is less chance they will be
> used in the future.
I could also do it in a patch. Is there any reason debian/rules is better?
> If you're already repacking the tarball due to DFSG issues [...]
I'm not. Thanks for the information.
> If it turns out that they are modified by your upstream [..]
I don't think so.
>> - or distinct programs, which work with or depend on collada-dom, and
>> are released with it. They could be built and packaged in debian, from
>> the same source package, but I won't do it myself (at least not now).
> Leave them in for folks who may want to download the source and build them.
>> I think some of these additional programs should go in contrib, because
>> they use nvidia-cg, whereas collada-dom is fit to main.
> You won't be able to build those from the same source package. I'd
> suggest asking upstream to split them out into a separate source
> package collada-dom-cg so that anyone who is interested can build them
> if needed.
Again, I don't think upstream will be responsive. But I agree this would be
the best solution, and it is worth filing a bug.
Thanks for your help.