[jerome: Re: apt and hplip]
Sorry, I forgot to CC the list.
--- Begin Message ---
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 11:29:42AM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> 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."
I should maybe rewrite it this way : "Redistribution and
modification of all tarballs and packages 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.
Maybe the tone is misleading, but english is not my native language, so
please forgive me.
> So you will excuse me (and others) if we took all of that as a subtle hint
> that we should leave pykota alone.
This is not the case, sorry if the website is misleading.
I think it is made clear (in welcome message) to each person who
purchased a subscription that they can redistribute their packages
freely. I just ask them to not redistribute the loginname and
password they obtain by purchasing their subscription, and that they
redistribute the packages instead of username+password, which seems
100% normal to me and probably to many people.
> 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.
This is GREAT news ! Thx
> 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
> in Debian.
BTW PyKota already exists in Gentoo IIRC.
bye, and sorry again if what is on the website is misleading :
just feel free follow the GPL, and I'll be happy :)
If there's still a doubt, feel free to redistribute this message as well !
--- End Message ---