Comment 9 for bug 675033

Revision history for this message
Stefano Rivera (stefanor) wrote : Re: [Bug 675033] Re: Application Review Request: Suspended Sentence 1.0.1

> I still find it weird not to have the changelog and copyright file in
> /usr/share/doc/<package name>/ and asked for clarification to other ARB
> members. I'd also be interested to know if doing that would break any
> tool as I'm myself quite used to look for changelogs and licensing
> details in there.

Indeed, thanks. Going from [0] and the month in early nanny where
pkgbinarymangler completely stripped changelogs, we can assume that
someone else did *some* research into the changelog component.

Copyright OTOH, who knows. Lintian complains, but I haven't seen any
tool breakage.

Obviously it will affect all documentation browsers. The best one can
really do here is provide a way to access the documentation, within the
app. I'm not about to do that, so I'm just not installing any
documentation at all.

[0]: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/performance-desktop-n-install-footprint

> was there any reason that you couldn't do something similar with the
> Monospace.ttf one ?

The only reason it's there is that we couldn't find any monospace fonts
under open-enough licencing to be shipped with our source code. That's
not really an issue here.

I had a quick look, there is a TTF font with the right courier-look,
FreeMono from freefont. But it doesn't render properly in Suspended
Sentence.

> It's not a major problem but still brings 670K of extra data in the
> package so I'm wondering if it can easily be avoided.

I'm imagining ARB packages in general will end up being quite bloaty.
Commercial, and non-packager-packaged software tends to be. Esp when
they'll have to bundle libraries.

> It's still fine as it's as the license name is mentioned in README.txt
> and the license text is in COPYING but it'd have been a bit easier to
> find the information if it was in the same file.

If I'm understanding what you are saying here, I don't think this is
unusual. Only the big licences tend to contain their names and separate
the license grant text from the license itself. So there is no need to
name the license in COPYING.

licensecheck can also tell you what's going on.