[Bese-devel] Re: rfc2109: upstream alive?

[Alan Shields]

On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 01:20:16AM +0200, Luca Capello wrote:
> I noticed that Attila committed some changes to the upstream rfc2109
> repository [1], mainly modifying the test suite.
> 
> As from [2], I tried with no success to contact its author before
> (cc:ed in this mail, too), because I'm the Debian maintainer and I had
> implemented a similar test suite, (available at [3]) as I didn't like
> the hardcoded SBCL dependency in test.sh.

Luca, my apologies. I'm under the weather something fierce. That and I
receive over 50 spam emails an hour - I found your old mails and will
go through them this weekend. Along with the other patches I've
received.

> The current implementation lets two files, unused IMO: test.sh and the
> file loaded by it, runner.lisp (try to load it and you see the output
> a bit different that the rfc2109.test ASDF system).  I think they
> should be removed or the test suite could load runner.lisp (renamed to
> test.lisp, as I did at [3]).
> 
> Moreover, as rfc2109.lisp contains RFC documents, I removed them from
> the Debian package [4] (they are against the DFSG [5]) and I'll
> propose the same for upstream (but this is a _very_personal_opinion_).

Stripping these is fine, though they're there to be the best form of
documentation (in my opinion).

Which clause of the DFSG do they violate? Any pointers from Debian Legal?
I admit confusion.

If anyone has any advice on the test suite, I'm all ears. Eyes. Whatever.

Lastly, thank you very much for packaging this. Your efforts are appreciated,
however much unsung.

Alan
-- 
"There are some folks that, if they don't know, you can't tell 'em."
    -- Louis Armstrong