Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> wrote: Short version: I think ICU is probably okay as long as we add some additional language to debian/copyright. Details, including suggested additional language, below.
> Can't be rebuilt without non-free sources: > > The package appears to be non-free (and has been for some time probably). > > The files in source/data/sprep/ are generated using filterRFC3454.pl from IETF > RFCs that are not included in the package and are (presumably, I didn't go > check since AFAIK, they are all non-free) non-free. The build tool itself is > at source/tools/gensprep/filterRFC3454.pl, but I don't think that the source > as is can be generated without use of non-free data. > > The new package is no worse than the old one, so I was am accepting it > with a serious bug filed, but this should be solved soon. Given the number > of reverse build-depends on icu as a whole, perhaps the parts that need the > MIBs can be split out into another package in contrib to avoid impacting all > the packages that use icu. I've looked at this situation, and I have reviewed the text of the DFSG, and I'm not sure I agree with your conclusions. While I wish to make sure that ICU is fully in compliance, I also don't want to walk down a path toward splitting the sources or something along those lines unnecessarily. Your original assertion that the package can't be rebuilt without non-free sources does not appear to be correct as far as I can tell. While the files in source/data/sprep/ were originally generated from RFC 3454, which is non-free in the DFSG sense, this generation is not part of the ICU build process. Also RFC 3454 itself is not included with the ICU sources, the sources don't contain any non-free files. The script used to generate the files is included, but it is not invoked as part of the build process. I tested this by removing it from a copy of the sources and rebuilding. I also can see by grepping that it is not invoked. It is invoked manually by upstream when needed, which should be never, since rfc 3454 is not a document that changes. As such, it is not true that ICU can't be rebuilt without non-free sources. I would argue that the files in source/data/sprep are more like derived works. They are an extraction of data from that RFC in a form that can be used by the build. They happen to be programmatically generated, but they could just have well been extracted manually. The copyright in rfc 3454 states: This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. Therefore, I think a sufficient resolution of this problem is to update the debian/copyright file to explain that some sources are derived from RFC 3454 with the above copyright, but that the non-free source file itself is neither included with icu nor required to rebuild icu. My proposed fix is to amend the debian/copyright file according to the attached patch. Do you think this is acceptable? If you think this is not acceptable, please point me to some documentation that supports a claim that the situation as I described it is not okay with regard to DFSG. While the decision about this should be based on the facts and not on the implications, I would point out that having this RC bug unresolved blocks ICU from transitioning to testing, and ICU is in the dependency chain of a large number of packages including libre office and boost. Also, the data here is critical to ICU's functionality and can't just be removed. So if ICU is deemed to be non-free, this will force a number of important packages into contrib unless we are able to come up with some other way to resolve this issue. I'd like to resolve this one way or another soon, so please let me know as soon as you can whether you accept my argument. Alternatively, we can pull in someone else from debian-legal or the technical committee who may be in a better position to interpret the situation. Thanks for your work and for helping to keep Debian free. I will admit that this issue had completely escaped my notice in the past as well, apparently, as that of ICU's past maintainers. -- Jay Berkenbilt <q...@debian.org> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
