> The good news is that I'm willing to fix bugs in my packages even when > they are not release critical :) > > I admit that I'm not as responsive as I should recently, but I'll try > to come back soon. > > As for the GPL version, my bad (I guess), this will be fixed soon. Very good, that should keep us under the radar of GPL enforcers! I imagine this package and its copyright file were written before v3 existed, so that it was (nearly) correct back then.
> As for the source of download, that will be fixed soon too (and I > guess that duckduckgo gave you the answer in the meanwhile). ...or aptitude, because their homepage is recorded in the control file. > As for the licensing of the media, this is not clearly stated upstream > either. I guess you know the drill for games: most of the projects > distribute the pngs only as the blender files are super heavy to store > and process. This is a clear infringement of the dfsg, but that's a > bad habit that is hard to fight in the milieu. I didn't check but I > wouldn't be surprised to learn that the blender files of wesnoth or > freeciv are not as easily available as the C/C++ sources... At least in Wesnoth, some artists consider the pngs to be the source, as they work on the raw pixels themselves... The vagueness of the source requirement in GPL doesn't help, but I've seen a proposal (I think) for something like this, only clearer, in the next release of the CC licenses. Education on licenses seems rather important too, I've heard of artists avoid CC-BY-SA because they don't know how SA works. Besides licenses, I see a role for better tools to improve the situation: license fields in media files metadata; some standardisation in automatic building of media, separated from the building source code; maybe better version tracking... I think the issue of Free Culture is just rather young compared to that of Free Software. > The situation is not completely desperate for widelands (at least > compared to other smaller games around), as most of the blender files > can be retrieved from: bzr branch lp:widelands-media > > Not all the models are available, as some of them were lost by the > designers, see: https://bugs.launchpad.net/widelands-media/+bug/677337 Well, in those cases, only the rendered pngs could be considered source. Reminds me of beneath-a-steel-sky... > Yep, that's a still very sorry state, but I feel like we need to help > upstream fixing the situation instead of becoming harsh on them. For > that, I openned the following bug to ask them to clarify the license. > My guess is that they consider this repo as a working directory and > juste forgot to write the licensing meta-information down. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/widelands-media/+bug/1144060 Absolutely, no need to alienate them! This looks more like the boring paperwork that got left behind. Maybe if it all were easier... > So, in conclusion. Thanks for your report, I'll try to come back on > this package as I recently managed to do for several of my other > packages. The issues you point are mainly missing pointers that I will > add. Be them serious or important. > > For the more profund issues underlying, I'll see with upstream about > how to improve it. It would be interesting to see if Debian can make the 'complete corresponding source' happen, in the longer run presumably. > Thanks for the report, > Mt. > Thanks for the answer, and good luck. Steven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
