Bug#538067: request for pkg review (ITP #538067)

[Hamish <hamish_b@yahoo.com>]

Hi,

it's been a while, so a small update:


* Package still sits in DebianGIS svn + webspace, AFAIK ready for upload
& awaiting a sponsor.

cleansed ver. 2.5.0 tarball:
  http://pkg-grass.alioth.debian.org/tarballs/
debian/ packaging rules:
  http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-grass/packages/opencpn/trunk/


* The optional GRIB plugin is GPLv3 while the main package is GPLv2+.
All plugins have now been moved out into their own binary package, which
is only Suggested by debian/control. Thus the two are no longer distributed
as a bundle. AFAIU if the user wants to manually install then manually activate
these plugins that's their business and GPLv2+ vs. GPLv3 issues are not involved.
This solution seemed less invasive than asserting GPLv3 over the entire package.
FWIW the plugin linking is by API calls and an #include'd "plugins.h". The
resulting binaries are created as plugin_foo.so; users may build and install
their own plugins that we don't ship (e.g. the google maps plugin) so
the plugins dir is always created, and left empty if the *-plugins package
was not installed. This may cause Lintian to be grumpy, but otherwise the
correct dir to use for 3rd party plugins is not obvious to the casual user.


* to put "dfsg" in the version number or not?

Hamish wrote:
>> You'll notice our source tarball is labeled dfsg. This is because
>> there were some included DLLs to help build the MS Windows
>> version of the program which we didn't need/want for the Linux
>> build, the source code itself is untouched.

Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
> Is the source included for those DLLS?

No. They are 3rd party; specifically Nullsoft's NSIS installer,
  http://nsis.sourceforge.net/License
and Microsoft's VisualC++ runtime redistributable.

NSIS is permissive FOSS; vcredist is free as in beer.

Without even considering the unused & source-avail-at-sourceforge NSIS,
I'm pretty certain that free-as-in-beer anything is not allowed to be
uploaded within src.tar.gz files, so it needs to be repacked anyway.

so it comes down to a trivial adjustment:
If pbuilder cares that the exact tarball filename matches the version
in the changelog file it is trivial to edit it in & I would leave that
to the DD uploader to adjust or not as they see fit.
For me building with `debuild -i -uc -us -b -j6` there is no issue.


aside: Anyone know the redistribution terms for vcredist_x86.exe ?
MS's download site does not make it obvious and I guess you have to
actually install it to get the EULA. -> Can a GPL'd Windows program
validly ship it as part of the install, or must it be left as a "why
does it fail with Error 14001?" FAQ on the project's homepage?



thanks,
Hamish