[3dprinter-general] Bug#706656: ITP: cura -- Controller for 3D printers

Bas Wijnen wijnen at debian.org
Thu Sep 22 06:06:46 UTC 2016

Hash: SHA1

I used the wrong address for the list; here's the message I was trying to send.
Gregor, sorry for sending it to you twice.

Hi Gregor,

Thanks for taking this on!  I've been meaning to do that for quite some time,
but didn't get to it so far.

Would you be interested in maintaining it inside the 3-D printer team?

Last time I tried to upload Cura (that was before Uranium, so a lot probably
changed), there were quite a few non-free files in the source.  What I still
needed to do was remove them (none of them were required for building the
package).  Did you check if they are still there, and remove them if so?

I didn't look at the package yet, but already have some feedback to what you
write.  I also CCd the 3-D printer team, so others know this is happening.

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 12:57:27AM +0200, Gregor Riepl wrote:
> - All code is released under Affero GPLv3. I believe this is not one of the
> preferred Debian package licenses, but it was deemed compatible with the DFSG
> previously.

Debian doesn't really have preferred licenses.  It is certainly compatible with
the DFSG, some people in Debian hate it and others like it (like me; I use it
for most of my own code).

By the way, is it AGPL3 or AGPL3+?  That is, did they specify "or any later
version"?  If not, that's something to ask if that was intentional.  The
license is acceptable for Debian regardless though.

> - libArcus is built into multiple packages: a shared library, development
> files/headers, and a python3 library. The python library is named
> python3-libarcus to reflect the relationship/dependency with libarcus itself.

Sounds good.

> - The CuraEngine package was named cura-engine2 to avoid conflicts with old
> Cura, which used a very different and incompatible versioning scheme. A
> "Breaks: cura-engine" was added, because both executables install under the
> same name.

I was going to file a request to remove the old package entirely.  It is broken
and there is no reason to fix it; it needs to be replaced with the new version.
Since the old version is much larger than the new one, you can use an epoch
(1:2.1.3) to force this to be a higher version.

With the same name for the package, there is no need for a Breaks:.

> - The debian branch is currently tied to the 2.1.3 release, I will try to keep
> it in sync with upstream releases.

Good idea.

> - Building the packages pollutes the source tree. I have not found a way to
> address this, any hints are appreciated.

Building in the source tree is not a problem in itself, but "debian/rules
clean" should restore or remove all the generated and/or changed files.  That
is, the tree should be identical after "debian/rules clean" and "debuild &&
debian/rules clean".

> Please test it and give me feedback, I will apply corrections and improvements
> as needed.

I hope to try it out soon and let you know.

> If the packages are accepted into Debian, I would like to request sponsorship
> from a Debian maintainer, as I do not have commit access.

I can help you with that.  If you choose to maintain it in the 3-D printer
team, others in the team can also help you out with that.

Version: GnuPG v1


More information about the 3dprinter-general mailing list