Freeness of cs*, new orig.tar.gz files (was: SVN texlive commit: r1603 - in texlive/trunk: . addons-per-bin addons-per-source)
Hilmar Preusse <hille42@web.de> wrote:
> On 08.09.06 Norbert Preining (preining-guest@costa.debian.org) wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>> Modified:
>> texlive/trunk/CHANGES.packaging
>> texlive/trunk/addons-per-bin/texlive-lang-czechslovak.README
>> texlive/trunk/addons-per-source/texlive-lang.changelog
>> texlive/trunk/tpm2deb.cfg
>> Log:
>> texlive-lang: re-include cs*
>>
> Did you come to the conclusion, that cs* is free after the latest
> discussions? Does that close #368968?
No, not really. Petr Olsak has promised to release a new, properly
licensed version by the end of September. This doesn't make the current
version free, but it gives a good chance that there will be a free
version. Therefore we (Norbert and I, partly in private discussion)
decided that we can as well delay fixing that bug for a couple of
weeks. Although the orig.tar.gz of TeXLive is autogenerated, it's still
more work (and upload time...) to prepare a "new upstream" version.
However, with the release coming nearer, we should think about a general
strategy for fixing DFSG bugs. Many of the bugs found so far are in the
state "upstream contacted, hoping and waiting for a result". But we
still have to face the fact that it might be necessary to remove some
files, and this should probably be coordinated, both with the release
managers and with maintainers of packages that might need these styles.
Actually I'm not sure which style files are used by other packages. I
have the feelings that the currently found non-free things are exotic
and/or old enough that it's unlikely, but this is just a feeling based
on no facts. So what we should do is something like:
- make a list of files that might need to be removed. Most of that is
already in the Wiki at http://wiki.debian.org/ProblematicCtanPackages,
but we should maybe have a second look.
(For example, I wasn't sure whether there are any files labelled as
non-distributable and Copyright-not-by-AMS in amslatex - there are no,
and I take Barbara Beeton's statements as sufficient to distribute
amslatex in main, even if the license situation as written is
currently unclear).
- Send a mail to the maintainers of all packages depending on any tetex
package (I don't think there's any that exclusively depends on
texlive), asking them to check whether any of these files is needed by
their package
- At the same time, or after we got some results, contact the release
team and ask them about the possibility to get a new, free orig.tar.gz
into etch, and whether they prefer us to upload a version now that
fixes all bugs, even if later some things can be reintroduced, or
whether we may delay that.
Regards, Frank
--
Frank Küster
Single Molecule Spectroscopy, Protein Folding @ Inst. f. Biochemie, Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer (teTeX/TeXLive)
Reply to: