Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Antoine Beaupre]

On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 06:58:02PM -0500, Kienan Stewart wrote:
> I've uploaded an updated package to mentors.debian.net. I think it's
> ready for more review/testing. I'm also looking for a sponsor if
> anyone is willing.

Hi!

I've done a thorough review of the package. I haven't reviewed the
upstream source code or attempted to rebuild the package myself. Here
are the issues I could find by looking in the debian/ directory:

 1. the version number is a little strange: "2.1.4-stable-1" I also
believe it violates policy (§5.6.12: version), because there is a
"debian revision" ("-1") so there can't be a dash in the upstream
revision ("2.1.4-stable"). In general, I believe it is not permitted
to have two dashes in version numbers: I'm surprised lintian let
that through, maybe a bug there!

https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/#version

i understand you may have chosen the version number to match the
tarball name from upstream, but we should help upstream to do the
right thing here. you can introduce them to semantic versioning, for
example. you can also "mangle" the url in uscan to remove the
"-stable" string, with something like "versionmangle=s/-stable//".

 2. The VCS fields are present (good) but they point to the upstream
repository (?) which is fine if you are the upstream, but in this
case there is a "debian revision", which means this is not a native
package, which I assume means you are not the upstream. The Vcs-*
fields should point to a repository where we can find the *debian*
packaging files, not the upstream repository. That is what the
Homepage field is for. I would recommend you try out the new GitLab
instance setup by the Debian project to host that repository, at
https://salsa.debian.org/

 3. not sure the "this is my first package" note is necessary in the
changelog :)

 4. debhelper is now at version 11, you might want to take a look at the
features (in the debhelper(7) manpage) and bump the compatibility level
in debian/compat and the dependency in debian/control

 5. purely cosmetic, but i like to align the dependencies in
debian/control. instead of:

   Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 9), clang, scons, libx11-dev, 
libxinerama-dev, libxcursor-dev, libxrandr-dev, libfreetype6-dev, libpng-dev, 
libasound2-dev, libpulse-dev, zlib1g-dev, libgl1-mesa-dev, libstdc++-6-dev, 
libgcc-6-dev, libssl-dev, libglu1-mesa-dev, libwebp-dev, libtheora-dev, 
libvorbis-dev, libopus-dev, libopusfile-dev, libglew-dev, ca-certificates

i find the following more readable:

   Build-Depends: debhelper (>= 9),
  clang,
  scons,
  libx11-dev, 
  [...]

this makes diffs easier to read for future changes and allows the
packages to be sorted easily.

 6. in the control file again, i would split the description in
paragraphs. for example, this:

 Godot is an advanced, feature packed, multi-platform 2D and 3D
 game engine.
 This package allows games to be run from source or data-pack.

should instead be:

  Godot is an advanced, feature packed, multi-platform 2D and 3D
  game engine.
  .
  This package allows games to be run from source or data-pack.

also consider having *exactly* the same common description in all
three packages and just change the last paragraph according to the
package.

 7. the manpage symlinks in debian/ are strange. why not just list
"misc/dist/linux/godot.6" in godot2.manpages? i'm not sure how to
setup manpage symlinks however, but i would suggest finding another
package that does it and looking at *how* it does so.
http://sources.debian.net has all the answers once you find the right
package. :)

 8. debian/godot.manpages probably does nothing and should be removed

 9. now for the patches. the add-openssl-1.1 patch has some template
stuff that should be removed. it should also explain why the patch
is necessary (e.g. why isn't it in the upstream release? will it
ever be?)

 10. the manpage patch has similar issues: is it from upstream? why
 isn't it in the release?

 11. the change-ca-cert-sources-path has the above, plus: isn't it
 possible to use the #thirdparty pattern to do such a replacement
 instead of using a patch? it looks like this is *designed* to be
 configurable from the outside

 12. the remove-thirdparty-ca-certificates patch is a big wth for me...
 if we change the path, why do we need to remove the certs? what's
 that thing with the symlink?

 13. the remove-unneeded-thirdparty-libraries patch is just scary. 32MB
 is just plain wrong. if you want to remove code, you need to
 repackage the tarball. it's nasty and weird, but basically, you
 rebuild the original tarball without all that crap, period. you
 also try to convince upstream to 

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Tobias Frost]

Hallo Kienan,

you should also claim ownership of the ITP package
(is it still owned by Bruno, but he said that he is ok
that someone taking over)

Thanks!

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Kienan Stewart]

I've uploaded an updated package to mentors.debian.net. I think it's ready for 
more review/testing. I'm also looking for a sponsor if anyone is willing.

Thanks,
Kienan


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Kienan Stewart]

Hi,

I've had a bit of free time to work on this and I've uploaded another version 
(based on 2.1.4) to mentors.debian.net : 
https://mentors.debian.net/package/godot

Thank both Francesco and Rémi for your advice in preceeding comments! I've made 
a number of changes, including having 3 packages as suggested by Rémi.

There are still a couple of small warnings to clear up, in particular I'd like 
to tackle the debug symbols warning and get the build to use the hardening 
flags next. I also haven't cherry-picked the desktop/appdata files from 
upstream yet.

All the changes I made are also available here: 
https://github.com/kienanstewart/godot/tree/2.1.4-stable-debian

Thanks,
Kienan


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Francesco Poli]

On Mon, 7 Aug 2017 21:43:43 -0400 Kienan Stewart wrote:

> I've had a first pass at creating a package for godot :
> https://mentors.debian.net/package/godot
[...]
> Once I find some time to clear up the lintian warnings, I'll do
> the RFS procedure
[...]

Hello Kienan,
I am a Debian user and contributor interested in seeing Godot packaged
for Debian.

I am afraid I won't have time to actively helping you out in the
packaging effort, but I would like to throw some suggestions in...


I read your three comments on the above-cited mentors.d.o page.


As far as the possible-gpl-code-linked-with-openssl Lintian warning
is concerned, I guess it's really caused by the debian/* licensing.
The general suggestion here is to license debian/* files not only in a
DFSG-free manner, but also at least as permissively as the upstream
software package.
Since Godot is mainly released under the terms of the Expat (MIT)
license, I would recommend you to re-license the debian/* files under
those same terms.

Moreover, I noticed that the upstream github repository includes
a file (named COPYRIGHT.txt) which (except for an initial comment)
seems to be formatted following the machine readable debian/copyright
file specification.
That file could be a good starting point to build the actual
debian/copyright file for the Debian package, of course without
forgetting to check against the actual package content!

I think that thirdparty/* projects should be purged from the orig.tar
archive (after making them unused, obviously!).
If you manage to do so, then you should not need to document their
licensing status. You should just document that they have been removed
by repacking the orig.tar archive...


Regarding the godot2 / godot3 split: if the two are installable side
by side, with no conflict whatsoever, and they are mutually
incompatible, then I think they should be packaged separately as godot2
and godot3, with distinct executable binaries.
But I would first concentrate on one version only (the stable one,
or maybe the alpha one, assuming it is usable enough: you get to
decide...).


Regarding the man pages, I would recommend you report upstream that
they are missing. If upstream developers do not consider this to be
a bug, I would suggest you to write the man pages on the basis of
upstream documentation and to contribute them back upstream
(under the same licensing terms as Godot).
Please see
https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/#manual-pages


That's all, I hope my comments may be of some help.

Thank you for your effort to package Godot for Debian!
Looking forward to seeing the package uploaded to unstable
and ready to be tested.

Bye!


-- 
 http://www.inventati.org/frx/
 There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory!
. Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82  3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE


pgpsIiN3qaNFd.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Kienan Stewart]

I've had a first pass at creating a package for godot : 
https://mentors.debian.net/package/godot

There are some lintian warnings to clear up, and I was wondering a bit about 
the following

 * builds only support amd64 at the moment
 * how to handle packaging godot 3.0 when it's available (an alpha is currently 
out)

Once I find some time to clear up the lintian warnings, I'll do the RFS 
procedure following the mentor's guide and 
https://wiki.debian.org/Games/Sponsors/Queue


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Kienan Stewart]

I'm also interested in helping to package godot for debian.

With the current stable of godot (2.1.3-stable), there's an incompatibility 
with the SSL version shipped in stretch (upstream issue: 
https://github.com/godotengine/godot/issues/8624)

I was able to build with: scons platform=x11 target=release_debug bits=64 
use_llvm=yes builtin_openssl=yes but I'm not sure if this will cause problems

Thanks,
Kienan


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Bruno Ramos]

Hello,

I'm sorry for the late reply.

I'm currently not actively working on this, after several tries I always
blocked on some point.
Please take over if you want.

If you need help let me know, maybe I can help you.

Thank you.

Regards,

Bruno

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 3:33 PM, eylul  wrote:

> Hi,
> I would like to try to help out with this, if possible. Is anyone
> actively working on this package?
>
> Thanks
>

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[eylul]

Hi,
I would like to try to help out with this, if possible. Is anyone
actively working on this package?

Thanks

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Julien Cristau]

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 23:29:14 +0200, Bruno Ramos wrote:

   Description : open source MIT licensed game engine
 
That's not a terribly useful short description.  Only the last two words
belong there, IMO.  The open source bit is kind of implied by it being
in Debian, and the exact license is what debian/copyright is for.

Cheers,
Julien


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#793057: ITP: godot -- open source MIT licensed game engine

[Bruno Ramos]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Bruno Ramos brunoramos...@gmail.com

* Package name: godot
  Version : 1.1-stable
  Upstream Author : Juan Linietsky, Ariel Manzur
* URL : http://www.godotengine.org
* License : MIT
  Programming Lang: C++
  Description : open source MIT licensed game engine

 Godot is an advanced, feature packed, multi-platform 2D and 3D game engine.
 It provides a huge set of common tools, so you can just focus on making
 your game without reinventing the wheel.

 Godot has been in development and used in-house by OKAM as early as 2001.
 In February of 2014 the source code for Godot was released to the public
 on GitHub under the MIT License.
 On 15 December 2014 Godot reached 1.0, first Stable release.

- Package to be maintained as part of the Debian Games team
  (http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-games/godot.git/)


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/20150720212914.12299.67533.report...@debian.lan