csound manual

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 08:31:39PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 20:03, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 03:34:18PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 17:19, Jonas Smedegaard <jonas at jones.dk> 
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 07:44:31PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:34:05PM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 12:00, Jonas Smedegaard <jonas at jones.dk> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 11:16:07AM -0400, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The page lists the complicated history of the manual. The 
>>>>>>>> important part is that the licensing was some non commercial 
>>>>>>>> license, and MIT held the rights to change that (Barry Vercoe 
>>>>>>>> et al were working at MIT while developing csound and the 
>>>>>>>> manual). Finally the licensing was changed to GFDL, and the 
>>>>>>>> manual moved to a sourceforge CVS repository, where the current 
>>>>>>>> development is still done. There is no way we can track who did 
>>>>>>>> what change to which file, but the best we can do is expand the 
>>>>>>>> "Andres Cabrera and others" to a list of 35 names and still 
>>>>>>>> have the "and others".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think at least we should document the situation in 
>>>>>>> debian/copyright, then.  Not needed to include all history, only 
>>>>>>> status quo is relevant (if possible without laying it all out)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How to do that in the dep5 format?
>>>>
>>>> [Whoops, I forgot to comment on the above...]
>>>>
>>>> DEP-5 mandates some sections and the naming of those mandated 
>>>> sections.  Trick is, it permits other fields too, and does not even 
>>>> (in most recent drafts) limit those to e.g. X-* names.  The idea 
>>>> is, I believe (and I think it is even mentioned in the 
>>>> specification - too lazy to check right now) is perhaps some 
>>>> unofficial add-on sections becomes common practice and can then 
>>>> easily (i.e. without need of updating existing files using it) be 
>>>> adopted in a later release of the specs.
>>>>
>>>> See e.g. the moin package for how I currently do unofficial tags 
>>>> similar to what might be done here.
>>>
>>> We only have detailed copyright information for the few scripts we 
>>> already have documented. What do you propose to do? Expand the 
>>> Andres Cabrera and others into the 35 or so names (and others)?
>>
>> Whatever it is that you believe makes this package DFSG-free, 
>> document that.
>>
>> Above you argue to me that the concrete names are not the important 
>> part, but the story is.  Do not explain to me, but to the world.
>
>Hmm. I believe you are confusing copyright assignment with 
>DFSG-freeness. The license is GFDL with no cover texts, so it is DFSG 
>free. Copyright years and names are a different matter.

They go together: Only the copyright holder can rightfully grant a 
license.  So if copyright holders are not properly accounted for, 
licensing is bogus!


  - Jonas

-- 
  * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
  * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20100630/733905ea/attachment-0001.pgp>