Joseph Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Now a few questions for debian-devel: > > > > 1) The license. Is the Open Publication License acceptable for Debian? > > (http://www.opencontent.org/) > > Depends entirely on what options, if any, are exercised. I cannot make > any determinations of freeness based on an ambiguous license with non-free > terms which may or may not apply. If none of them are exercised, I am > reasonably sure it is DFSG-free. debian-legal may have more opinions.
As far as I can see it should be DFSG-free. But I am no native English speaker and have no experience with this kind of thing. I'll check with debian-legal. > > 2) The source. Grokking the GIMP is a HTML version of a book written in > > LaTeX. I have asked upstream for permission to package the HTML > > version, but I have not yet asked whether the LaTeX is available, but > > I think it isn't. Is that a problem? > > Sortof. If errors are found, patches can be sent upstream if the source > is included. Also someone will scream DFSG violation if the LaTeX isn't > present since that is the source code. Generated HTML is sometimes very > messy, so I can see technical reasons for wanting the source.. I'll ask upstream. If Carey Bunks releases the source, all the better. If he doesn't (and I don't think he will, because the book is copyrighted by his publisher), we'll have to live without. > > 3) The GIFs. "Grokking the GIMP" includes about 28 MB of GIFs. Should > > I convert them to PNG, as there are patent issues with GIFs? The > > license allows modifications, and I think using PNGs might also save > > some space. > > Patent covers making, not viewing. Converting them would be a political > statement, but is not required as a matter of laws. I'll probably leave it how it is, then. Converting the GIFs to PNG may be part of a future release. > > 4) The name. The book's title is "Grokking the GIMP"; thus the most > > obvious package name would be "grokking-the-gimp". Renaming it to > > "gimp-grokking" would not reflect the original title so well, but it > > would be closer to the other gimp packages on the package list. > > book-grokking-the-gimp or doc- or something maybe? Else leave the name > alone. No, I was thinking of a name near to "gimp*" in alphabetical order, like "gimp-grokking", so that the package shows up near the gimp. But I think adding it as "suggested" package to the gimp is the better solution. > > > > 5) The GIMP documentation. Do you think it would be useful to include > > "Grokking the GIMP" in the GIMP's help menu if it is installed? I > > have not yet asked the GIMP maintainer whether it is feasible or > > whether he would want to do that. What do you think? > > Not necessary, but it could be cool. Maybe I'll do it in a future version. I'll see what people want first. > > 6) The size. "Grokking the GIMP" is a 26 MB .tar.gz. This is a little > > hard for people on 56K. Would it make sense to create another > > package with graphics in a lower quality? Or would this just be > > bloating Debian? > > As one of those 56k people, I'll manage. Ok, you asked for it :-) > =) Just don't upload a new > version every two weeks if you can help it, ne? I'm on 64K. So I won't. Thanks for your answers. -- Aaron Isotton http://www.isotton.com/ My GPG Public Key: http://www.isotton.com/gpg-public-key -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
