Bug#538067: RFS: opencpn
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 07:29:52AM -0700, Hamish wrote:
> an update on ITP progress for the OpenCPN software (opencpn.org).
Another update about OpenCPN package.
debian directory in svn is updated to build against 2.4.708,
there where problems with tinyxml patch and I fixed them.
1. Since we are using dfsg tarball I think the version
should include "+dfsg" otherwise my pbuilder fails to find
the tarball. I have added this to changelog.
Main thing is that I have produce DEP-5 compilant copyright
file:
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-grass/packages/opencpn/trunk/debian/copyright?view=markup
I believe there are missing items and issues still. So we
need to review this. But after that copyright things should
be clear for everybody, even for robots. Particular items
that I have questions:
2. src/nmea0183/* plugins/*/src/nmea0183/* have the following:
* Copyright (C) 2010 by Samuel R. Blackburn, David S Register
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify *
* it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by *
* the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or *
* (at your option) any later version.
* S Blackburn's original source license: *
* "You can use it any way you like." *
* More recent (2010) license statement: *
* "It is BSD license, do with it what you will" *
So it is not clear which license it is under now? If it is
BSD than which clause version and why GPL header? If it has
been relicensed to GPL than I am not sure if it is possible
to do so providing the given statement from author?
3. plugins/grib_pi/src/Grib* plugins/grib_pi/src/Iso* plugins/grib_pi/src/ZuFile
are taken fron ZyGrib and licensed as GPL-3+. Our code is
GPL-2+ and I think it is not backward compatible. However as
I understand this item is a plugin, so maybe it is ok, but
not sure.
4. Image files. We need to add them to the copyright file
and understand their licenses and copyright owners.
5. Any other exceptions in source code. Will need to check
for them and add to copyright file.
Beside this there are some less hard issues:
6. Plugins are still installed to /usr/lib/opencpn although
empty directory /usr/lib/opencpn_plugins is being created.
7. Lintian proposes to register the documentation with
doc-base. I am going to study it, but does it make any sense
for our package?
Thanks.
--
Anton Martchukov
http://www.martchukov.com
Reply to: