RFS: mped (QA upload)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 5.1.3-1 of my package "mped". It builds these binary packages: mped - Minimum Profit, a programmer's text editor The package appears to be lintian clean. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mped - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mped/mped_5.1.3-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Vincent Legout -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS dxcentral 1.42 - hamradio related package
I wrote: > I just revised the package: now it is (and not only appears to be) > lintian clean. > A lintian --pedantic run reveals only two minor flaws: > 1. - direct-changes-in-diff-but-no-patch-system > 2. - no-upstream-changelog I just took the corrective actions for these two lintian hints. Now the package verifies even with lintian -iI --pedantic I also checked it using pdebuild... >> The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: >> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/contrib/d/dxcentral - Source >> repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main >> contrib non-free - dget >> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/contrib/d/dxcentral/dxcentral_1.42-1.dsc >> >> >> I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Regards, Andreas Weller -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
RFS: jetty (updated package)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 6.1.22-1 of my package "jetty" (team maintained). It builds these binary packages: jetty - Java servlet engine and webserver libjetty-extra - Java servlet engine and webserver -- extra libraries libjetty-extra-java - Java servlet engine and webserver -- extra libraries libjetty-java - Java servlet engine and webserver -- core libraries libjetty-java-doc - Javadoc for the Jetty API The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 553644, 554877, 558187 and it is needed as part of the efforts to bring a recent Eclipse version into Debian. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/j/jetty - - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/j/jetty/jetty_6.1.22-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards Pablo Duboue -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJLKJPNAAoJEMJ09r9KJ69qCZwQANN1nQy2o0BFzxhJsSMhjPRm z3L05ulXuh6F6Nrhl5ISUGGMLbKf3qPw7GKG5suHmtD/Fc2g3rN46iGJst9Bivcn zIMMmDPX3vG/OHS9W4NuDsOR7INXDe39mux/bqTuYj4eSJbCSXotPgZU/I7/z3O1 JWUCCojJG++Tn6WLwBpTe5IUI7Ya1kXMAa17hrj0Mw8lYLob9EcZqenGrUY50lQ8 JabTdKQAoOCUMR/nOPdeizOFUJdZxpWydagQY2WBjgh9XMmz9pQWfNAEQTRjFcfs vPkp7RIx0NvJ246bjBww4tL5Bq0k3ZsQryubWj9e8HkgovyBvbgrq5KATdJp25FT znxietVrvEDD8wgy/e1suVlrfNvPM+NHeAVJ9NeNu9V2zCPHfa88rYbR4SzlGhaw I3RfI0gj9jKT693ArI6rVyahShQGCrCV7j8CDxegU1KHJUbBhYMVWuZBVmKqAIp2 vvaPKQweEAfasLSzrkzX4jjrKn7Mv6f+wIYKyGUaQp4qLy97H0YPwC3HlmZfqZbJ 4zcFx8rWM8ixnJM4ng775FTFk998CABE0d5B2wrSu7b1wv6zvcAbm68rNIrDuEfB xYktDbvor9EIcww9f6+79ZPnQ9zvnyTWIYp2uhKeP6h5i3h6Gdmt87QHMBob70s8 X+riS7PgIKn9kp3nM3Xs =H3Iw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
RFS: vfu (updated package)
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.10-1 of my package "vfu". It builds these binary packages: vfu- A versatile text-based filemanager The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 560456 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/v/vfu - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/v/vfu/vfu_4.10-1.dsc I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. Kind regards William Vera -- William Vera PGP Key: 1024D/F5CC22A4 Fingerprint: 3E73 FA1F 5C57 6005 0439 4D75 1FD2 BF96 F5CC 22A4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
RFS: xbmc
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xbmc". * Package name: xbmc Version : 1:9.11~svn25756.rc1~deb1-1 Main Contact: "Team-XBMC" Upstream Author(s) : Andreas Setterlind [Gamester17] Staffan Lindberg [pike] Arne Morten Kvarving [cptspiff] Anoop Menon [d4rk] Joakim Plate [elupus] Jonathan Marshall [jmarshall] Tobias Arrskog [Topfs2] Roee Vulkan [vulkanr] Winfried Soltys [WiSo] Yuval Tal [yuvalt] John W Vanderbeck [agathorn] Trent Nelson [AlTheKiller] Andres Mejia [ceros] Gunnar Norin [blittan] Dean Ross Parry [C-Quel] Sylvain Rebaud [c0diq] Martin van Beurden [chadoe] Scott Davilla [davilla] Stephan Diederich [MaestroDD] Benjamin Bertrand [Beenje] Benjamin Dickgiesser [DonJ] [GeminiServer] Christian Granqvist [Granqvist] Dave [kraqh3d] Luigi Capriotti [l.capriotti] Sean [malloc] Kyle Hill [monkeyman] [MrC] [nad] [nuka1195] Vincent Blackwell-Price [Voinage] Robert Parris [rwparris2] Sigurdur H. Olafsson [sho] Alasdair Campbell [Alcoheca] Georgy Yunaev [oldnemesis] Chris [phi2039] Bob [bobo1on1] David Allonby [motd2k] Robert Rudd [Rudd] Eric G [Tslayer] Amund Scharning [tut-ankh-amon] Matthias Kortstiege [VDRfan] Daniel Mehrwald [AreaScout] Oumar Aziz Outtara [wattazoum] Chris Haley [CHI3f] [Jezz_X] [Smokehead] Darren [Bizzeh] Marc [Bobbin007] Richard [Butcher] Jan-Willem [Darkie] Chris Branson [forza] [Kreet] [Ysbox] Erwin Beckers [Frodo] Albert Griscti-Soler [RUNTiME] Phil Burr [d7o3g4q] (a.k.a. Duo Egaq) Mathias Mahling [chokemaniac] * URL : xbmc.org * License : GPL-2+ Section : non-free/video (because of certain third party code with non-DFSG clauses) It builds these binary packages: xbmc - XBMC Media Center (full metapackage) xbmc-bin - XBMC Media Center (binary data package) xbmc-data - XBMC Media Center (arch-independent data package) xbmc-dbg - XBMC Media Center (debug package) xbmc-eventclients-common - XBMC Media Center (Event Client Common package) xbmc-eventclients-dev - XBMC Media Center (Event Client Dev package) xbmc-eventclients-j2me - XBMC Media Center (Event Client J2ME package) xbmc-eventclients-ps3 - XBMC Media Center (Event Client PS3 package) xbmc-eventclients-wiiremote - XBMC Media Center (Event Client WII Remote support package) xbmc-eventclients-xbmc-send - XBMC Media Center (Event Client XBMC-SEND package) xbmc-live - XBMC Media Center (XBMC Live package) xbmc-scripts-example - XBMC Media Center (example scripts) xbmc-skin-confluence - XBMC Media Center (Confluence skin) xbmc-skin-pm3-hd - XBMC Media Center (PM3 HD skin) xbmc-standalone - XBMC Media Center (standalone program) xbmc-web-iphone-tlrobinson - XBMC Media Center (Iphone web skin) xbmc-web-pm - XBMC Media Center (Project Mahem web skin) xbmc-web-pm3 - XBMC Media Center (Project Mahem III web skin) The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 469397 My motivation for maintaining this package is: I'm one of the XBMC developers. I help maintain the packages in the Launchpad PPAs. I would like to see xbmc packages distributed through Debian and ultimately through Ubuntu. The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/non-free/x/xbmc - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/non-free/x/xbmc/xbmc_9.11~svn25756.rc1~deb1-1.dsc I would b
Re: RFS: mped (QA upload)
Vincent Legout wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 5.1.3-1 > of my package "mped". > > It builds these binary packages: > mped - Minimum Profit, a programmer's text editor > > The package appears to be lintian clean. > > The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mped > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main > contrib non-free > - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mped/mped_5.1.3-1.dsc > > I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. > > Kind regards > Vincent Legout > > Uploaded, thanks Vincent. Barry deFreese Debian QA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: xbmc
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Andres Mejia wrote: > XBMC is licensed under the GPL-2+. There are various third party code and > libraries used as well, documented in the copyright file. There are also > various > files and third party code used with licenses that have non-DFSG clauses. > None of the licenses makes XBMC undistributable however, which is why the > xbmc packages are being placed in non-free. Work is being done to resolve > these licensing issues. See [1] for more details. ... > 1. http://xbmc.org/trac/ticket/7983 Sounds undistributable to me (not even non-free), unless the XBMC license is changed to the LGPL or there is a GPL exception for linking against non-free code. There are several bits of code that are free software but GPL incompatible, you need to replace/remove these. For the RSA MD5 implementation replacement you should use the implementation from whatever crypto library you link against, instead of introducing the 447th[1] copy of md5.c into the archive: http://source.debian.net/source/search?path=md5.c >From what I can tell from the copyright file, there are also vast amounts of embedded code copies, please have them all removed from the upstream tarball before seeking sponsorship again. If that isn't possible, please consult the security team to ask if it is OK to have this amount of embedded code copies in one package, even Mozilla isn't quite this bad. For stuff that isn't in the archive yet, you should package that instead of creating an embedded code copy. libdvdcss isn't available from Debian for good reason, it should definitely not be available in xbmc. Another WTF was a non-free implementation of CRC32 of all things!??!! This indicates XMBC is not yet ready for Debian: "Copyright Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. License: UNKNOWN", please withdraw this RFS and remove the package from mentors.debian.net until the copyright/license issues are resolved. > The 'DM-Upload-Allowed: yes' field is set. I am a DM and also one of the > upstream devs for XBMC. I would like to keep this field set so that I may be > able to upload this package myself. If any potential sponsor absolutely has a > problem with this, I would be willing to unset it (or have it unset), of > course > after some negotiation. The DM-Upload-Allowed field is for sponsors to set after they are satisfied that you can maintain the specific package well. You should never include it in your first RFS. > The package also appears to be piuparts clean, although some dependencies > of xbmc is causing the piuparts test to fail. Relevant log message. ... > Packages causing this are 'fontconfig', 'python-support', and 'python-apt'. It would be helpful to file bugs here if they don't exist yet. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: vfu (updated package)
William Vera wrote: > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 4.10-1 > of my package "vfu". > > It builds these binary packages: > vfu- A versatile text-based filemanager > > The package appears to be lintian clean. > > The upload would fix these bugs: 560456 > > The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: > - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/v/vfu > - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable > main contrib non-free > - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/v/vfu/vfu_4.10-1.dsc > > I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me. > > Kind regards > William Vera > > Uploaded. Thanks. Barry deFreese Debian QA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: RFS: xbmc
On Wednesday 16 December 2009 21:15:40 Paul Wise wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Andres Mejia wrote: > > XBMC is licensed under the GPL-2+. There are various third party code and > > libraries used as well, documented in the copyright file. There are also > > various files and third party code used with licenses that have non-DFSG > > clauses. None of the licenses makes XBMC undistributable however, which > > is why the xbmc packages are being placed in non-free. Work is being done > > to resolve these licensing issues. See [1] for more details. > > ... > > > 1. http://xbmc.org/trac/ticket/7983 > > Sounds undistributable to me (not even non-free), unless the XBMC > license is changed to the LGPL or there is a GPL exception for linking > against non-free code. Which license/issue are you referring to? Last I checked, all these problematic licenses had clauses like "you can't use this for commercial purposes", "you must send us patches upon request", or some other stupid clause like "you must not code on any Monday at 3:05pm in someone else's bedroom". Even if XBMC were changed to LGPL, BSD, or whatever, I don't see how that will help with the third party code with these other restrictions. So as far as I know, XBMC is at least distributable. It just unfortunately has some code that contains other restrictions like these nagging non-commercial clauses, which is keeping it from going to main. > There are several bits of code that are free software but GPL > incompatible, you need to replace/remove these. Ok, yes. I did say it's being worked on. > For the RSA MD5 implementation replacement you should use the > implementation from whatever crypto library you link against, instead > of introducing the 447th[1] copy of md5.c into the archive: > > http://source.debian.net/source/search?path=md5.c Alright, my fault for overlooking that. :/ I'll simply use the public domain implementation from dpkg. > >From what I can tell from the copyright file, there are also vast > > amounts of embedded code copies, please have them all removed from the > upstream tarball before seeking sponsorship again. If that isn't > possible, please consult the security team to ask if it is OK to have > this amount of embedded code copies in one package, even Mozilla isn't > quite this bad. For stuff that isn't in the archive yet, you should > package that instead of creating an embedded code copy. Yes, there are third party libraries in the source tarball. Most however is not used at all (at least when the proper configure switch is set to make XBMC build against system libs). At least for Debian/Ubuntu, the default would be to have XBMC use system libs. We (as XBMC upstream) eventually want to make use of system libs where available, and not just for Debian/Ubuntu. I really don't want to resort to having to change the source tarball anymore from the original than it already is. > libdvdcss isn't available from Debian for good reason, it should > definitely not be available in xbmc. And it's not. It's was included in the copyright file as a way to give credit. I suppose I'll remove it to avoid confusion. > Another WTF was a non-free implementation of CRC32 of all things!??!! > > This indicates XMBC is not yet ready for Debian: "Copyright Microsoft > Corporation. All rights reserved. License: UNKNOWN", please withdraw > this RFS and remove the package from mentors.debian.net until the > copyright/license issues are resolved. Ok. This was clarified in the Trac bug log as already being resolved. I guess I'll clarify it here too. That copyright file is somewhat outdated. I only included it in the bug log to make it somewhat easier to find the issues I found. I changed the copyright file seeing that it was becoming harder to read by humans. So, there isn't any use of a non-free implementation of CRC32, or anything that's copyright to Microsoft. Again, as far as I know, XBMC is distributable. It unfortunately contains some code that's keeping it from entering main. > > The 'DM-Upload-Allowed: yes' field is set. I am a DM and also one of the > > upstream devs for XBMC. I would like to keep this field set so that I may > > be able to upload this package myself. If any potential sponsor > > absolutely has a problem with this, I would be willing to unset it (or > > have it unset), of course after some negotiation. > > The DM-Upload-Allowed field is for sponsors to set after they are > satisfied that you can maintain the specific package well. You should > never include it in your first RFS. I can't find any information that states the field should be set by sponsors. Seeing that I have been sponsored before for other packages with the field set (after I told my sponsors), I would rather wait for a sponsor who's willing to upload with the field set. > > The package also appears to be piuparts clean, although some dependencies > > of xbmc is causing the piuparts test to fail. Relevant log mes
Re: RFS: xbmc
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Andres Mejia wrote: > On Wednesday 16 December 2009 21:15:40 Paul Wise wrote: >> Sounds undistributable to me (not even non-free), unless the XBMC >> license is changed to the LGPL or there is a GPL exception for linking >> against non-free code. > > Which license/issue are you referring to? Last I checked, all these > problematic licenses had clauses like "you can't use this for commercial > purposes", "you must send us patches upon request", or some other stupid > clause like "you must not code on any Monday at 3:05pm in someone else's > bedroom". You cannot satisfy both the GPL and these clauses at the same time, which prevents distribution of XBMC in binary form at least. > Even if XBMC were changed to LGPL, BSD, or whatever, I don't see how that will > help with the third party code with these other restrictions. With an LGPL/BSD XBMC you can satisfy the license of both XBMC and the non-free stuff at the same time. > So as far as I know, XBMC is at least distributable. It just unfortunately has > some code that contains other restrictions like these nagging non-commercial > clauses, which is keeping it from going to main. They conflict with the GPL, so they keep it from being uploaded to Debian at all. >> There are several bits of code that are free software but GPL >> incompatible, you need to replace/remove these. > > Ok, yes. I did say it's being worked on. Good to hear, but until that work is complete, XBMC is not distributable by anyone who doesn't want to violate the GPL (which includes Debian ftpmasters). >> For the RSA MD5 implementation replacement you should use the >> implementation from whatever crypto library you link against, instead >> of introducing the 447th[1] copy of md5.c into the archive: >> >> http://source.debian.net/source/search?path=md5.c > > Alright, my fault for overlooking that. :/ I'll simply use the public domain > implementation from dpkg. Ah, that means you will be adding the 447th copy of md5.c to Debian. Could you instead dynamically link against one of the crypto libraries (Fedora prefer libnss, Debian doesn't have a standard crypto lib) and use the implementation from that? > Yes, there are third party libraries in the source tarball. Most however is > not used at all (at least when the proper configure switch is set to make XBMC > build against system libs). At least for Debian/Ubuntu, the default would be > to have XBMC use system libs. We (as XBMC upstream) eventually want to make > use of system libs where available, and not just for Debian/Ubuntu. Good to hear. > I really don't want to resort to having to change the source tarball anymore > from the original than it already is. It would be good to get these removed upstream too. For OSes without adequate packaging/repository systems you could create a separate tarball containing tarballs with code from all the projects you depend on. An example of this is warzone2100's devpkg: http://download.gna.org/warzone/development/devpkg/ >> libdvdcss isn't available from Debian for good reason, it should >> definitely not be available in xbmc. > > And it's not. It's was included in the copyright file as a way to give credit. > I suppose I'll remove it to avoid confusion. I see from the get-orig-source script that you removed them from the tarball too, great. > Ok. This was clarified in the Trac bug log as already being resolved. I guess > I'll clarify it here too. That copyright file is somewhat outdated. I only > included it in the bug log to make it somewhat easier to find the issues I > found. I changed the copyright file seeing that it was becoming harder to read > by humans. > > So, there isn't any use of a non-free implementation of CRC32, or anything > that's copyright to Microsoft. Ah, sorry for looking at the outdated copyright information. >> > The 'DM-Upload-Allowed: yes' field is set. I am a DM and also one of the >> > upstream devs for XBMC. I would like to keep this field set so that I may >> > be able to upload this package myself. If any potential sponsor >> > absolutely has a problem with this, I would be willing to unset it (or >> > have it unset), of course after some negotiation. >> >> The DM-Upload-Allowed field is for sponsors to set after they are >> satisfied that you can maintain the specific package well. You should >> never include it in your first RFS. > > I can't find any information that states the field should be set by sponsors. > Seeing that I have been sponsored before for other packages with the field set > (after I told my sponsors), I would rather wait for a sponsor who's willing to > upload with the field set. That was how it was presented during initial discussions of the field, seems like that policy was never written down where the relevant persons would see it and current practice is to add it wherever possible, sigh :( -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@list
