Bug#775194: RFS: mininet/2.2.0 ITP - process-based network emulator
❦ 17 janvier 2015 22:51 +0100, Tomasz Buchert tomasz.buch...@inria.fr : OK, I don't mind. We'll see what FTP masters will say about that. The package is ready to upload, should I? I believe so :). Done! -- Debian package sponsoring guidelines: http://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring.html signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#775194: RFS: mininet/2.2.0 ITP - process-based network emulator
❦ 12 janvier 2015 16:59 +0100, Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org : I have not tested the result, but the package looks good otherwise. I've just reuploaded the package to mentors. It should be visible in few minutes. I'll try the package later. I am fine with the package as is. What do you think about what I said about debian/copyright and the MIT/Expat license? -- Debian package sponsoring guidelines: http://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring.html signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#775194: RFS: mininet/2.2.0 ITP - process-based network emulator
On 17/01/15 22:02, Vincent Bernat wrote: ❦ 12 janvier 2015 16:59 +0100, Vincent Bernat ber...@debian.org : I have not tested the result, but the package looks good otherwise. I've just reuploaded the package to mentors. It should be visible in few minutes. I'll try the package later. I am fine with the package as is. What do you think about what I said about debian/copyright and the MIT/Expat license? -- Debian package sponsoring guidelines: http://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring.html Hi Vincent, my only concern is that the text of the license is not literally the MIT/Expat license so I would prefer to call it differently. See (https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#license-specification): These short names have the specified meanings across all uses of this file format, and must not be used to refer to any other licenses. Parsers may thus rely on these short names referring to the same licenses wherever they occur, without needing to parse or compare the full license text. Tomasz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#775194: RFS: mininet/2.2.0 ITP - process-based network emulator
❦ 17 janvier 2015 22:17 +0100, Tomasz Buchert tomasz.buch...@inria.fr : I am fine with the package as is. What do you think about what I said about debian/copyright and the MIT/Expat license? my only concern is that the text of the license is not literally the MIT/Expat license so I would prefer to call it differently. See (https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#license-specification): These short names have the specified meanings across all uses of this file format, and must not be used to refer to any other licenses. Parsers may thus rely on these short names referring to the same licenses wherever they occur, without needing to parse or compare the full license text. OK, I don't mind. We'll see what FTP masters will say about that. The package is ready to upload, should I? -- Debian package sponsoring guidelines: http://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring.html signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#775194: RFS: mininet/2.2.0 ITP - process-based network emulator
On 17/01/15 22:33, Vincent Bernat wrote: ❦ 17 janvier 2015 22:17 +0100, Tomasz Buchert tomasz.buch...@inria.fr : I am fine with the package as is. What do you think about what I said about debian/copyright and the MIT/Expat license? my only concern is that the text of the license is not literally the MIT/Expat license so I would prefer to call it differently. See (https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#license-specification): These short names have the specified meanings across all uses of this file format, and must not be used to refer to any other licenses. Parsers may thus rely on these short names referring to the same licenses wherever they occur, without needing to parse or compare the full license text. OK, I don't mind. We'll see what FTP masters will say about that. The package is ready to upload, should I? -- Debian package sponsoring guidelines: http://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring.html I believe so :). Tomasz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#775194: RFS: mininet/2.2.0 ITP - process-based network emulator
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: normal Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package mininet: * Package name: mininet Version : 2.2.0 Upstream Author : Bob Lantz et al. * URL : http://mininet.org/ * License : BSD-like (mininet-license) Section : net It builds those binary packages: mininet - process-based network emulator To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/mininet Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mininet/mininet_2.2.0-1.dsc More information about hello can be obtained from http://www.mininet.org. Notes: * the package was difficult to prepare for reasons related to open vswitch: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=757761; the bug was workarounded and the new version does not require Openswitch controller in the system (it will degrade to pure software switch, see: https://github.com/mininet/mininet/pull/432) Regards, T. Buchert -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#775194: RFS: mininet/2.2.0 ITP - process-based network emulator
On 12/01/15 15:03, Vincent Bernat wrote: ❦ 12 janvier 2015 14:30 +0100, Tomasz Buchert tomasz.buch...@inria.fr : It builds those binary packages: mininet - process-based network emulator To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/mininet Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mininet/mininet_2.2.0-1.dsc More information about hello can be obtained from http://www.mininet.org. In Ubuntu, the package is maintained by James Page. I pinged him a week ago about packaging it in Debian but got no answer. Your package seems an original work. Did you try to reach James about that? Did you look at how the problems you got have been solved in this version? Hi Vincent, I don't quite remember if I have met James electronically yet. I know, however, that Ubuntu packaging of openvswitch provided openvswitch-controller which solved the problem for them. This is described in the bug #757761. About the package: - in d/control, you recommend openvswitch-controller but no such package exists in Debian. Thanks, my bad. - in d/copyright, you license debian/* under GPL-2+ but since the original software is licensed as MIT, it would be better to use the same license. This allows upstream to integrate your changes more easily. That makes sense. However, the license is *not* MIT literally speaking (https://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/mininet-discuss/2014-August/004879.html). I renamed the license to mit-mininet-license and used the same license for debian/* as you proposed. - in d/copyright, the license is MIT with a preface, just use MIT as the keyword (but keep the whole license). See above. - in d/repack, why is this script here if not used? Well spotted. I removed it (note, however, that there is a comment at the beginning saying that it may be used one day). - in d/rules, you use python_distutils as a build system, this will call python setup.py clean in dh_auto_clean, not make clean. This explains why you have to use make clean. As for CPPFLAGS, this is because the Makefile don't include it. I think both of your fixes are fine. Ok, I removed todos. - d/TODO should be removed if those problems are solved. Done. I have not tested the result, but the package looks good otherwise. I've just reuploaded the package to mentors. It should be visible in few minutes. Thanks a lot, Tomasz -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#775194: RFS: mininet/2.2.0 ITP - process-based network emulator
❦ 12 janvier 2015 14:30 +0100, Tomasz Buchert tomasz.buch...@inria.fr : It builds those binary packages: mininet - process-based network emulator To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/mininet Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/m/mininet/mininet_2.2.0-1.dsc More information about hello can be obtained from http://www.mininet.org. In Ubuntu, the package is maintained by James Page. I pinged him a week ago about packaging it in Debian but got no answer. Your package seems an original work. Did you try to reach James about that? Did you look at how the problems you got have been solved in this version? About the package: - in d/control, you recommend openvswitch-controller but no such package exists in Debian. - in d/copyright, you license debian/* under GPL-2+ but since the original software is licensed as MIT, it would be better to use the same license. This allows upstream to integrate your changes more easily. - in d/copyright, the license is MIT with a preface, just use MIT as the keyword (but keep the whole license). - in d/repack, why is this script here if not used? - in d/rules, you use python_distutils as a build system, this will call python setup.py clean in dh_auto_clean, not make clean. This explains why you have to use make clean. As for CPPFLAGS, this is because the Makefile don't include it. I think both of your fixes are fine. - d/TODO should be removed if those problems are solved. I have not tested the result, but the package looks good otherwise. -- Debian package sponsoring guidelines: http://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring.html signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Bug#775194: RFS: mininet/2.2.0 ITP - process-based network emulator
❦ 12 janvier 2015 15:43 +0100, Tomasz Buchert tomasz.buch...@inria.fr : - in d/copyright, you license debian/* under GPL-2+ but since the original software is licensed as MIT, it would be better to use the same license. This allows upstream to integrate your changes more easily. That makes sense. However, the license is *not* MIT literally speaking (https://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/mininet-discuss/2014-August/004879.html). I renamed the license to mit-mininet-license and used the same license for debian/* as you proposed. Well, the binding parts of the license is the MIT license (this is what you also said in the mailing post, isn't it?). This is a bit like the preface for the GPL license. This is not the license, but we still say this is the GPL. It explains the motivation. So, like for GPL, I think that you should say this is MIT but keep the whole text (unlike GPL which is present in base-files). I just think that by using a dedicated keyword, this would make people (or programs) think that this is a MIT-derivative (with more conditions or some exception) while this is not the case. Oh, and we say MIT, but the right keyword is Expat. Sorry. I have not tested the result, but the package looks good otherwise. I've just reuploaded the package to mentors. It should be visible in few minutes. I'll try the package later. -- Debian package sponsoring guidelines: http://vincent.bernat.im/en/debian-package-sponsoring.html signature.asc Description: PGP signature
