On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 10:08:28PM +0200, Graham Inggs wrote: > Hi > > Another reminder about this: > > On Sun, 20 Dec 2020 at 01:33, Adrian Bunk <b...@debian.org> wrote: > > Looking at the cluster3 discussion, just a reminder that many packages > > in non-free can be autobuilt just like packages in main: > > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.en.html#marking-non-free-packages-as-auto-buildable > > > > This is also already happening for Debian Med packages: > > https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/vienna-rna > > https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=vienna-rna > > cluster3 now needs a rebuild for the Python 3.10 as default transition [1]. > > Regards > Graham
Hi Graham, Thanks for the reminder. It's unfortunate, but the link to the full license that causes the package to be non-free is broken and I don't see a full copy of the license in either the package (neither in the sources nor in d/copyright) or in the email thread about the license [1]. For that reason, I'm hesitant about items (1) and (3) from the Developer's Reference [2]: > 1. Check whether it is legally allowed and technically possible to > auto-build the package; > > 2. Add XS-Autobuild: yes into the header part of debian/control; > > 3. Send an email to non-f...@buildd.debian.org and explain why the > package can legitimately and technically be auto-built. If there is already precedent for packages that violate multiple terms of the DFSG being legally and legitimately allowed to be auto-built, I am happy to revisit the matter. For the time-being, I have uploaded a binary package to move the transition along. Thanks, tony [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2016/02/msg00000.html [2] https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.en.html#marking-non-free-packages-as-auto-buildable
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
