[DRE-maint] Comments regarding webgen_1.7.2-1_amd64.changes

[Sean Whitton]

Hello Daniel,

On Wed 19 May 2021 at 12:50AM +02, Daniel Leidert wrote:

> I also found that webgen's Git tree has a scalable vector graphics of the logo.
> However, I disagree that it is mandatory to be provided with the source as it
> seems to be requested by the FTP masters here. Probably every image shipped
> with any of the sources in Debian has some other kind of "source", be it a gimp
> xcf project file, a scalabale vector graphics, or any other kind of image
> project file. It has never been required to ship whatever the creators have
> been used to create the image (and I have maintained dozens of packages).
>
> Neither the Debian policy nor the GPL request to ship anything other than the
> image file itself. Why should I provide a RAW or SVG file to fulfill the policy
> or the GPL? On what grounds is that request based?

It's based on the idea that we want to ship the preferred form of
modification for every file.  This is standard NEW queue practice.  If
no-one has a copy of that file any more then it is no longer the
preferred form for modification.  That's why I asked about whether it
was available or not.

> JFTR: Even if an image has a hint that it was processed by inkscape,
> the source could have been a PNG or JPEG as well as inkscape can load
> such files too.

Right.

> Actually the webgen source is GPL-3+, not GPL-3 as claimed by the license-
> shortname in debian/copyright. That should indeed be changed/fixed with the
> next upload. There is no reason that we limit the source to v3 of the GPL for
> the Debian package. However, given the fact that the file in question is GPL-2+
> and that most parts of the project's source are GPL-3+, I think it is a
> sensible decision to put rake_task.rb in the Debian package under GPL-3(+) as
> well in accordance with its licensing. I saw it before I uploaded it and still
> think that this is ok.

Yes, it's okay, but Policy does say that d/copyright is meant to include
all its licensing information, and arguably the information that the
file is also available under GPL-2 is part of its licensing
information.  So nice to include if it's easy to do so, at least.

-- 
Sean Whitton
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 869 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers/attachments/20210816/be54d384/attachment.sig>