Re: [ITA] muse-el, with issues, and questions
On 29 August 2016 at 17:15, James Cowgill <jcowgill@debian.org> wrote:
> On 29/08/16 21:49, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm adopting muse-el. Right now it's a work-in-progress. The steps I
>> took to fixup this package can be found here:
>>
>> https://github.com/sten0/muse-el
>> clone: https://github.com/sten0/muse-el.git
>>
>> I've also uploaded a package, with "-sa" full sources for review here:
>> https://mentors.debian.net/package/muse-el
>> https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/muse-el/muse-el_3.20+dfsg-1.dsc
>>
>> I'm not sure what to make of lintian Error
>> "license-problem-gfdl-invariants" against the README. The README
>> says:
>> The Muse manual is available under the terms of the GNU Free
>> Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by
>> the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, and with the
>> Front-Cover texts and Back-Cover Texts as specified in the manual.
>>
>> Does the README itself also fall under the GFDL or GPL-3? If not,
>> I'll have to add another exclusion to debian/copyright. Additionally,
>> should I break out the documentation into a non-free muse-el-doc
>> package?
>
> This seems to be bug #695783 which was fixed in 3.20+dfsg-0.1 by
> removing the manual. If you haven't repacked the source, the manual
> should still be removed so there shouldn't be a problem here. The
> copyright statement specifically refers to the Muse manual so the README
> file should be fine. Assuming there aren't any more cases of this in the
> package, you can probably override the lintian error (with a suitable
> comment).
I did repack the source, making use of watch+copyright exclude files
automation and also enabling crypto sig verification, because there
were a number of comments in the source of the existing package that
didn't match the alleged upstream source. My guess is the source was
pulled from git, even though a tarball was cited as the source,
because the numbers looked like they might be automatic timestamps.
Also, it's now xz compressed, which I anticipated is something
Gianfranco might hassle me about if I didn't enable haha.
Thank you for the review!
Nicholas
Reply to: