Bug#757669: RFS: libstrophe/0.8.6-1 [ITP]
On Sun, 2014-08-10 at 21:44 +0200, Dariusz Dwornikowski wrote:
> > Hi Dariusz,
> >
> > reviewing.. As usual here an (unordered) list:
>
> Thank you.
> >
> > -> please read d/README.source and act accordingly :)
>
> Done. Deleted, since not needed anymore.
>
> >
> > -> d/copyright
> > The source is dual-licensed. Please correct the license.
> > The line
> > Copyright (c) 2005-2009 Collecta, Inc.
> > is misplaced (I think you wanted to put it two lines earlier)
> > as this is not part of the license.
>
> I always act according to the rule "when in doubt, copy the whole
> license from upstream". Their MIT-LICENSE.txt is with this Copyright
> line.
> https://github.com/strophe/libstrophe/blob/master/MIT-LICENSE.txt
>
> I deleted the line from there.
>
> >
> > Same below with the debian/* files.
> >
> > Regarding License.txt... They say
> > "This program is dual licensed under the MIT *and* GPLv3 licenses."
> > (emphasis by me) Do upstream mean "or" here? (I'm not sure if you can
> > comply to both licenses at the same time; better ask debian-legal if the
> > "and" is ok or if a sentence like "on your choice" is missing.) It would
> > be anyway great if upstream could add a license header NOT refering to
> > LICENSE.txt in every file ... as this could create problems if a file is
> > to be used outside of libstrophe. It would be much clearer, also
>
> I already created an issue in github to clean this. As for dual
> license thing, I did ask for opinion on that months ago and got an
> answer from Russ Albery, claiming that I could just "pick" a license.
>
> Here is the relevan post:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2014/05/msg00055.html
OK, then its also fine with me!
> I will also write to Debian legal to look at this.
>
> >
> > (As they link against openssl, they probably need the openssl exception
> > when applying the GPL. Refer also to
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2002/10/msg00113.html) Shouldn't
> > be a problem for MIT, but IANAL.)
> >
> > -> d/docs has the license text files and you exclude them in again in
> > d/rules...This program is dual licensed under the MIT and GPLv3
> > licenses.
>
> I cleaned this now, thanks.
>
> >
> > -> why no symbols file?
>
> Added symbols file with the help of dpkg-gensymbols. Already in git.
>
> >
> > -> d/rules
> > you should call bootstrap in override_dh_autoreconf, not in
> > override_dh_auto_configure:
> >
> > override_dh_autoreconf:
> > dh_autoreconf ./bootstrap.sh
> >
> > Then you also won't need to override autoclean.
> > (I any prefer a clean file over overriding debhelper targets)
>
> Super thanks for that !
>
> >
> > (Also please unset DH_VERBOSE when uploading...)
>
> Yes, deleted now.
>
> >
> > "unused substitution variable ${misc:Pre-Depends}"
> > Pre-Depend is missing in d/control (multi-arch support...)
> >
> According to policy 7.2, putting Pre-Depends should be first discussed
> on dd@, or am I missing something ?
>
This Pre-Depends is necessary due for the multi-arch support. See
https://wiki.debian.org/Multiarch/Implementation
Ok, just a last nitpick I missed earlier.
your debian/*.dirs are not needed (refer to
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/dother.en.html#dirs
I think you can remove them :)
So, let me know when you uploaded your new version to mentors...
--
Tobi
Reply to: