Sven Neumann wrote: > David Neary <bolsh@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > I suggest pushing all these bugs, with the exception of bug > > #83362, to a target other than 1.2.4 (either 1.2.5, 1.2.x or > > CLOSED with WONTFIX). > > What do you think we should do about #83362 then? > (http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83362) Well, obviously it's a blocker for 1.2.4 (Bugzilla says so :) - the question is how best to remove BLOCKER status from it. For the most part the problems are small, or don't really exist any more - it's mostly copyright messages that could be removed if we so felt like it, since the code to which the copyright applies no longer exists. But there are a couple of sticky ones which need addressing - namely, SIOD, nlfilter and gif. The way I see it, there are 3 solutions - 1) Accept that SIOD stays, and if repackagers want to distributee the GIMP as non-free, then so be it. Either copy gif code from another gpl program (say gif2png) or contact opriginal author for re-licencing, or add it as an exception. Contact nlfilter author for relicencing, or drop plug-in. If the contacts don't yielmd answers by the end of this week, we should make a decision. For the rest of the code, either acknowledge that there is code that needs relicencing, and get onto the people who did it, or declare that all the code that was taken from bsd licenced software was fairly trivial, and re-licence under GPL. For the most part, the latter should do. 2) Continue to delay the release of a bug-fix patch for the gimp until we have a new, fully tested scheme interpreter, and we can get in contact with anyone who ever wrote code for the gimp and didn't realise that the BSD advertising clause was incompatible with the GPL (even if they're now working a humanitarian aid worker in the Peru highlands who haven't looked at a computer since they wrote a gimp plug-in as their final year project). I think we should go for 1, send requests to relicence bits of borrowed code to GPL for the important bits, just declare ourselves compliant and relicence for the trivial bits, add SIOD as an exception to our GPL, and if we haven't gotten permission to relicence nlfilter by next Friday, drop it. If we haven't gotten permission to relicence gif, steal some gpl code. Or steal some GPL code now... In any case, I think that we should split it into 3 bugs, nlfilter, gif and SIOD licencing, and for the rest, just declare everything GPL. > > Basically, I think we should have 1.2.4 within the next few days. > > The CVS is rock stable, we've had a decent shepherd in Sven > > stopping anything resembling unstable code from going in, and I > > think it's time for a release. > > I whole-heartedly agree and unless Yosh speaks up I volunteer to take > his job of doing the 1.2.4 release although I really hate to do > releases in the 1.2 tree. First because Yosh should do them and second > because 'make dist' doesn't work in 1.2. What's wrong with make dist in 1.2? In any case, there are now 8 bugs targetted for 1.2.4 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?product=GIMP&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=NEEDINFO&bug_status=REOPENED&target_milestone=1.2.4&form_name=query Of these 8, several have been set from 1.2.x. Bug #98490 and bug #51164 are up for grabs - very shallow bugs. Who wants to fix them? It would be nice if someone with HPUX could check if bug #15546 is still alive. It would also be nice if someone could check that bug #82465 is still reproducible. Bug #108004 Needs attention before 1.2.4 - once there has been some analysis done, we can see whether it's feasible to have a quick fix, or whether it gets batted back to 1.2.5. If we want a 1.2.4 release this week, these need to be addressed. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary, Lyon, France E-Mail: bolsh@xxxxxxxx
