Bug#752897: rm -rf debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/lucene++-3.0.6/
> Hi Tobias
>
>>
>> Hi Gianfranco,
>>
>> Yes, collab-maint would be indeed the best option and can be done after
>> the initial upload. So just remove VCS-* for now and re-add once you've
>> decided how to go on.
>>
>
> Removed
>
>> Back to the package. Sorry, took me longer than expected to take deeper
>> look, but the review should be complete now. So I think this will be the
>> last iteration...
>>
>> During the review of d/copyright I found those mismatches which might
>> need clarification:
>>
>> -> ./src/contrib/analyzers/common/analysis/ar/ArabicAnalyzer.cpp
>> ./src/contrib/analyzers/common/analysis/fa/PersianAnalyzer.cpp
>> seems to be generated from BSD Data. Not sure how they have been
>> generated and what is the effective license is indeed tricky. Can you
>> check with upstream how the data is processed and if that is enough to
>> constitute a new copyright? (However, It would be best if the files
>> could be autogenerated at build time and the stoplist file distributed
>> with the tarball.)
>> For now, I'd recommend to add an comment to d/copyright stating that the
>> file has been created using BSD-Licensed data from http://...
>
> https://github.com/luceneplusplus/LucenePlusPlus/issues/70
>
>>
>> -> ./src/contrib/snowball/libstemmer_c/* is missing in d/copyright and
>> it is (as far as can see) an embedded code copy. (Debian source package
>> snowball). As convenience copies are strongly discouraged, please try to
>> patch lucene so it will link against the package version.
>> (If you find out, this is not feasible, please let me know along with
>> your reasoning)
>>
>
> https://github.com/luceneplusplus/LucenePlusPlus/issues/71
>
>> So, this seems now to be the last two points to be fixed. Then I'll
>> upload it :)
>>
>
>
> thanks again, I opened the two above upstream issues, because the problem
> is not debian-specific and I'm not in the position of force a system library
> when a custom delta might be needed (and moreover I don't see it used, as
> I wrote on the issue).
>
> So I'll update as soon as I get upstream feedbacks!
Great. Regarding the issue 70 (let me quote it by the issue number), as said
it would be ok for me just to comment the fact in d/copyright (and in a later
upload act according upstream's decission).
Regarding 71, if you are sure that it won't be used, just use a
debian-specific patch to remove it.
Regarding the submitted issue upstream, please note that according to the
package libstemmer "Snowball upstream doesn't build shared libraries, so they
are Debian-specific."
We can wait for upstreams' reaction, but we can also go on; just decide and
let me know.
--
tobi
Reply to: