On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 06:05:00PM +0200, Aaron Isotton wrote: > "Grokking the GIMP" is very readable and includes lots of example > graphics. Very cool. I sometimes like to have dillusions of artistic talent, this may help... *shrug* =) > 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. > 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.. > 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. > 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. > 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. > 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. =) Just don't upload a new version every two weeks if you can help it, ne? -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@bluecherry.net> Certified free software nut As a computer, I find your faith in technology amusing.
Attachment:
pgpTlLcBSFd3U.pgp
Description: PGP signature