On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Philip Taylor
<excors@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I've left all the CCs in; should they all be maintained, or can
>> > some be dropped?
>> >
>> > [...]
>> > ./binaries/data/tests/collada/sphere.pmd
>> > - its a data file, and i can't see a free software tool to open
>> > this.
>>
>> It's the game's custom format for mesh data
>> (
http://trac.wildfiregames.com/wiki/PMD_File_Format).
>
> So it can be modified by the game/related tools?
It can be created and parsed and rendered (but not modified) by the
game engine. It used to be exported by a custom 3ds Max plugin but we
no longer use that (we export to Collada since ~4 years ago). It's not
designed to be a modifiable format, but it's not theoretically
impossible to modify - there's a Python script at
http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/461 to convert .pmd back into
editable Collada format so it can be imported into e.g. Blender,
though that currently only works for static meshes and not
skeletally-animated ones.
>> > ./binaries/data/tools/fontbuilder/fonts/*
>> > - this doesn't appear in d/copyright; because they're not installed
>> > from here?
>> > - i note that there is a comment in there to this effect "The
>> > Converted... fonts were produced by opening the originals in
>> > FontForge 20090923, changing the names, and exporting as
>> > TrueType.". problem for debian?
>>
>> Those files aren't used in the build or installation at all, they're
>> just used by an offline tool that converts them to PNGs (so it was
>> convenient to keep the original font files in SVN and they're not
>> explicitly excluded from the release tarballs).
>
> Are these the original? the comment implies they are not.
DejaVuSans.ttf, DejaVuSansMono.ttf, texgyrepagella-regular.otf,
texgyrepagella-bold.otf are unmodified originals.
ConvertedPagella-Regular.ttf, ConvertedPagella-Bold.ttf are
non-original and derived from texgyrepagella-*. The original
texgyrepagella-* are from
http://www.gust.org.pl/projects/e-foundry/tex-gyre under the license
http://www.gust.org.pl/fonts/licenses/GUST-FONT-LICENSE.txt (LaTeX
Project Public License 1.3c plus a suggestion to rename the fonts when
modifying them).
Just for clarification: mentors, if there are files in the source package that are unused during a build of that package (in this case, fonts), and not installed by the package, do I still need to document them in debian/copyright? Or can I just safely ignore them and not have to worry about copyright and licensing issues? Or should I simply remove them from the source package?
>> > ./libraries/fcollada/src/FCollada/FColladaTest/Samples/Copyright.txt
>> > ./libraries/fcollada/src/FCollada/FColladaTest/Samples/Eagle.DAE
>> > - according to the Copyright file, Eagle.DAE is non-free.
>>
>> [...]
> Any chance you could stop shipping the DAE file? otherwise debian will
> have to repack the tarball.
Changed the tarball generation script in
http://trac.wildfiregames.com/changeset/9160
Since nobody has mentionned it yet, i'd just like to take a moment and thank Philip for taking the time to explain and clear up a lot of potential licensing issues, and for being a cooperative upstream. We really appreciate your time and effort. :)