[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#1041488: Please review patches for initial upload



Hello Elias,

On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 11:49:46PM +0200, Elias Oltmanns wrote:
> Sorry for all those emails, but I have just realised that
> debian/README.source needed fixing. The reason is that I started out
> with the test suite disabled but have managed to get it running after
> all.
> 
> So, I have added another patch to the previous two and will append all
> three to this message.

I have created a git repository for the Debian packaging [1] and started
reviewing the package.  Everything looks good from the standpoint of
constructing the .deb.

I haven't uploaded yet because I am not yet sure how (or whether it is
even necessary) to document the license and copyright of a few of the
test resources.  In particular, these files:

Files: jwat-arc/src/test/resources/IAH-20080430204825-00000-blackbook.arc
       jwat-arc/src/test/resources/IAH-20080430204825-00000-blackbook.arc.gz
       jwat-gzip/src/test/resources/IAH-20080430204825-00000-blackbook.warc
       jwat-gzip/src/test/resources/IAH-20080430204825-00000-blackbook.warc.gz
       jwat-warc/src/test/resources/IAH-20080430204825-00000-blackbook.warc
       jwat-warc/src/test/resources/IAH-20080430204825-00000-blackbook.warc.gz

For which the decopy [2] utility generates a very messy copyright entry
that ends with:

    License: CC-BY-NC-SA-ND-3 or Expat or GPL or LGPL-2.1+

It's conceivable that these WARC [3] files contain copyrighted materials
and that uploading them as components of the source package would be
considered redistribution, but I am admittedly not well-versed enough in
this area to say for sure without looking into the contents in more
detail.

It would be nice to be able to (a) use the files as-is so that we don't
have to either (b) remove the files and disable tests, or (c) replace
the files and rewrite the tests that access them.  I spot-checked a few
tests and they appear to expect to be able to locate specific contents
in the archive, so (c) would be non-trivial and could result in the
package being quite difficult to maintain over time, since any upstream
changes to those tests would require updating the patch(es).

Let me know if you have any thoughts on this.  Otherwise, I will follow
up once I have a chance to look through the test resources in more
detail.

Thank you,
tony

[1] https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/libjwat-java
[2] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/decopy
[3] https://www.loc.gov/preservation/digital/formats/fdd/fdd000236.shtml

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: