* Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@eds.org> [2013-10-30 12:11]: > Patches in a Debian package are not meant for adding new functionality. They > are meant to get the code building/working/installing on Debian, and for > fixing security bugs. So the package that includes those patches should be > named after the source of those patches. Even better, that package should be > based off of that source's release. Those patches are not in the referenced > git repo (https://github.com/PrimeSense/Sensor) and there is no description in > each patch to say where its from. In the spirit of free software, people > should be able to find all of the original sources of a package.
Huh, every path in [1] should have a reference where it was taken from. I didn't provide a commit id because they are almost all part of one big patch. > Is there a source repo somewhere that includes those patches? Then lets use > that and name the package after that. It was https://kforge.ros.org/openni/drivers back then, but seems like that doesn't exists anymore. > Are any of them from the avin2 repo? As commented in the patches in [1]. > I think adding a USB ID to support other devices is an OK thing to do in a > patch. Great, me too :). Could you comment on which patches you think are not ok then? Cheers Jochen [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-multimedia/openni-sensor-primesense.git;a=tree;f=debian/patches;hb=HEAD _______________________________________________ pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list pkg-multimedia-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-multimedia-maintainers
