Re: apt and hplip
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, blah wrote:
> > And most DDs who thought of adding it to Debian refrained from doing it, on
> > the express wishes of pykota's author.
> This is plain bullshit !
> I've NEVER asked anyone to refrain from uploading PyKota to Debian.
Is it? That's good news! But you need to rephrase what you have in the
website, then. As it stands, it looks like we would be hurting PyKota
development if we shipped it in the distro.
In the CUPS website we have this:
"Full access to source code is granted to all for no fee via Subversion (aka
svn), but installable tarballs, as well as DEB and RPM packages download is
for a fee. Redistribution and modification is allowed to all under the terms
of the GNU GPL."
And there is the whole "Why no tarball or package is available for free :"
section at http://www.librelogiciel.com/software/PyKota/Download/action_Download
You don't ask that distributions refrain from packaging pykota directly, but
the whole tone of the pages, plus the fact that there ARE official debs/rpm
packages can transmit that idea.
So you will excuse me (and others) if we took all of that as a subtle hint
that we should leave pykota alone. Users probably did too, they probably
prefer to use your official DEBs, as we didn't have an avalanche of requests
for PyKota in the wnpp buglist requesting its packaging.
> In summary, if PyKota is not part of Debian, this entirely the decision
> of DDs.
Your email just made PyKota ITP'able without any possible drawbacks. It
will probably be packaged by someone if I don't get to it soon.
Keep in mind that it will be the unnofficial version if *I* package it. I
have no personal need for pykota, but it is a damn cool software that I
would package to have the full hplip,foomatic,gutenprint+cups+pykota suite
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot