Bug#152631: ITP: grokking-the-gimp -- Grokking the GIMP is the online version of Carey Bunks' GIMP tutorial book.
Package: wnpp Version: N/A; reported 2002-07-11 Severity: wishlist * Package name: grokking-the-gimp Version : 1.0 Upstream Author : Carey Bunks [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.gimp-savvy.org/book * License : Open Publication License Description : Grokking the GIMP is the online version of Carey Bunks' GIMP tutorial book. This is the HTML version of Grokking the GIMP, an excellent introduction to the GIMP and to image processing in general. It covers the basic GIMP tools, layers, selections, masks, color spaces, color manipulations, photo touchup and enhancement, compositing, shadows, punchouts, bevels, and how to use the GIMP to create online content (animated GIFs, clickable image maps etc). Grokking the GIMP is very readable and includes lots of example graphics. --- Now a few questions for debian-devel: 1) The license. Is the Open Publication License acceptable for Debian? (http://www.opencontent.org/) 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? 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. 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. 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? 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? I hope you can help me. Thanks, Aaron -- System Information: Debian Release: 3.0 Architecture: i386 Kernel: Linux zarathustra 2.5.25-aisotton #2 Sat Jul 6 18:18:14 CEST 2002 i686 Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C -- no debconf information -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#152631: ITP: grokking-the-gimp -- Grokking the GIMP is the online version of Carey Bunks' GIMP tutorial book.
On Thu, Jul 11, 2002 at 06:05:00PM +0200, Aaron Isotton wrote: Now a few questions for debian-devel: 1) The license. Is the Open Publication License acceptable for Debian? (http://www.opencontent.org/) This question is better addressed to debian-legal. In any event, if this work uses the OPL without any of the optional clauses, it is DFSG-free. Otherwise, please discuss this issue on debian-legal. -- G. Branden Robinson| It's not a matter of alienating Debian GNU/Linux | authors. They have every right to [EMAIL PROTECTED] | license their software however we http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | like. -- Craig Sanders pgpuSdU5Gswmy.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#152631: ITP: grokking-the-gimp -- Grokking the GIMP is the online version of Carey Bunks' GIMP tutorial book.
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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]Certified free software nut As a computer, I find your faith in technology amusing. pgpx79H96WU45.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#152631: ITP: grokking-the-gimp -- Grokking the GIMP is the online version of Carey Bunks' GIMP tutorial book.
Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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. As far as I can see it should be DFSG-free. But I am no native English speaker and have no experience with this kind of thing. I'll check with debian-legal. 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.. I'll ask upstream. If Carey Bunks releases the source, all the better. If he doesn't (and I don't think he will, because the book is copyrighted by his publisher), we'll have to live without. 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. I'll probably leave it how it is, then. Converting the GIFs to PNG may be part of a future release. 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. No, I was thinking of a name near to gimp* in alphabetical order, like gimp-grokking, so that the package shows up near the gimp. But I think adding it as suggested package to the gimp is the better solution. 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. Maybe I'll do it in a future version. I'll see what people want first. 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. Ok, you asked for it :-) =) Just don't upload a new version every two weeks if you can help it, ne? I'm on 64K. So I won't. Thanks for your answers. -- Aaron Isotton http://www.isotton.com/ My GPG Public Key: http://www.isotton.com/gpg-public-key -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
