Bug#765421: jmapviewer: Download bing logo via attribution XML at runtime?
fnatter at gmx.net
Tue Oct 21 18:52:58 UTC 2014
"Sebastiaan Couwenberg" <sebastic at xs4all.nl> writes:
> Hi Felix,
>> Sebastiaan Couwenberg <sebastic at xs4all.nl> writes:
>>> On 10/20/2014 11:17 PM, Felix Natter wrote:
>>>> Felix Natter <fnatter at gmx.net> writes:
>>>>> => I think we need to investigate that for jessie+1, but now I think
>>>>> should parse the "attribution data" and use the included link to
>>>>> download the logo at runtime (many thanks to the patch  from Marcus
>>>>> Lundblad <ml at update.uu.se> and Martin KrÃ¼ger
>>>>> <martin.krueger at gmx.com>)?
>>>>> We should really agree on something now ;-)
>>>> --> Can we all agree on this solution for jessie?
>>>> (which is probably legal if JMapViewer itself is legal)
>>>> I'd suggest to apply this patch now to make sure it's fixed for jessie!
>>> Yes, until we hear otherwise it seems to me the best solution to the
>>> Bing logo license problem.
>>> I've cleaned up the patch a little and added DEP3 headers for inclusion
>>> in the jmapviewer package. When the patch is forwarded upstream we have
>>> a nice opportunity to get the upstream point of view on this issue.
>> Thanks for your help! I pushed the change to jmapviewer git and tested
>> with josm (and freeplane).
> Do you intent to update the package with the 1.04 upstream release?
> JMapViewer 1.04 contains the patch in slightly modified form, more in line
> with the upstream coding convention.
I would rather not like to do this, because i.e. from 1.02 to 1.03 they
introduced incompatibilies and I had to fix freeplane, and I might
not have enough time to fix freeplane (and josm) before the freeze :-/
>> Don Armstrong wrote:
>>> At the very least, I'd stick a note in NEWS.Debian.gz.
>> => Do we really want to do this? I think that problematic
>> bing support is not quite new for this package?
> Documenting the problems with the Bing logo is a good idea in general.
> I'm inclined to document it in README.Debian instead of in a NEWS item,
> because the logo was never part of the package. But NEWS items are more
> visible thanks to apt-listchanges.
Ok, I added your patch description to README.Debian.
>> @Andreas: Could you sponsor this tomorrow?
BTW: the git repo is here:
> Would it make sense to sponsor the new upstream version instead of the
> patches 1.03?
I appreciate that you reported the patch upstream so quickly, but I
would prefer to stick with 1.03 for jessie.
Thanks and Best Regards,
More information about the Pkg-grass-devel