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

Re: Debian Maintainer application



Raphael Geissert:
> I wouldn't say they have zero activity because:

I've looked all these WNPP bugs over, and while one or two contain the
info you list above, most of them consist of just the original WNPP bug, tagged
pending for a long time, with no followup about why it's not uploaded.

That's a pattern that I find very annoying in general. You're obviously not
the only developer to do this; in fact I suspect that a large fraction of
all WNPP bugs have a similar lack of information.
 
> php-qt: license problems (as usually, the PHP and GPL license conflict),
> upstream is already aware and I'm waiting to see what they propose. The
> main problem is that php-qt links to Qt4 which is GPL and would also
> conflict with PHP's license even if php-qt adds an exception to its
> license.
> 
> php-amfext: it is released under the PHP license which is rejected by
> ftp-master for things that aren't PHP itself.

This inconsitency is news to me, and makes no sense as described.
Any references?

> I contacted upstream many
> months ago and he said I could continue packaging but he never made a
> release with a license change. I pinged him more than one month ago and
> haven't received a reply.
> 
> libphp-amf: there's a mix of GPL and PHP code which prevents one of the main
> parts of the application to be shipped. I'm currently waiting for version
> 2.0 to be released.
> 
> kio-locate: I've even been added to the pkg-kde alioth project so I could
> co-maintain it with the KDE Extras Team. In order to build the package it
> requires scons, but there's currently a bug which prevents the built
> program from being 'installed' (see #459685)

According to the BTS, the bug is marked notfound in the current version
of scons, if I read it right the bug is thought to be in a kde.py file,
isn't that part of kio-locate.

> zend-framework: there are some files which are released under a different
> license (everything reported at upstream's issues tracker[1][2][...]).

The first of these seems to consist of nothing more than some copyright
statements in files that aren't formatted identically to others:

-    *  @copyright Copyright (c) 2005-2007 Zend Technologies Inc.
-       (http://www.zend.com)
+    *  @copyright Copyright (c) 2005-2007 Zend Technologies USA, Inc

How can such a trivial inconsistency be somehow significant to Debian?

The second issue is about a file that was licensed under version 1.0 of
the Zend Framework license, and will be switched to a BSD license. Is
the old license not DFSG free?

> php-htscanner: by some reason I haven't been able to use the extension's
> functionality in newer releases of PHP5 so until I find something useful I
> won't try to upload a package which no longer works.
> 
> kblogger: there's a RPATH being defined an, at least, amd64 (although i386
> is not affected), and there are some time stamping issues when posting with
> blogger's API. I'm waiting for version 0.7 to be released.
> 
> kcometen3: it also has some RPATH issues which I've tried to fix by updating
> some of the autotools files but result in build problems. I prefer to fix
> it 'the right way' instead of using chrpath or similar tools.

-- 
see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: