Re: [OctDev] image 2.0.0 released

[Rafael L. <ra...@la...>]

* Carnë Draug <car...@gm...> [2012-11-11 13:34]:
>
> Fix with r11422. Can I further help with this by creating a proper 
> COPYRIGHT file for the package? I already tried to follow the debian 
> upstream guide http://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamGuide#Licenses that asks 
> to list each file and its license.

This is not really necessary, but may help.  When putting together 
Debian packages, We use a tool called licencecheck (in package 
devscripts) that parses every upstream file and automatically generate a 
copyright file according to DEP5 (http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/). This 
file is further edited for reducing the number of stanzas.  I am 
attaching below the current debian/copyright file of the Debian package, 
which gets installed as /usr/share/doc/octave-image/copyright.

>> On 11 November 2012 09:54, Rafael Laboissiere <ra...@la...> wrote:
>>
>> 3) The function fftconv2 gives a wrong result when called like this: 
>> "fftconv2 (vector1, vector2, matrix)", although this usage is advertised 
>> in the help string.  For the Debian package, I am planning to apply the 
>> patch attached below, which (i) removes the advertisement from the help 
>> string, (ii) gives an error message when the function is called with the 
>> said usage and (iii) drop the tests with the said usage.
>
> You forgot to attach the patch.

Sorry.  Attached now.

> I don't know what changed to make this usage stop working so I only 
> left a note on the source code and should not appear on the help 
> string (at least it doesn't on my system).  Do not remove the tests, 
> mark them with xtest instead. I think I have done that before but 
> apparently forgot to commit. I'd give a warning instead of an error 
> since the reason it fails may be due to changes in the other functions 
> it uses and users with different versions may actually get the correct 
> results. Please see r11421.

Well, IMHO it is not a good idea to allow function to give results that 
are known to be wrong.  I will see with the other members of the DOG 
(Debian Octave Group) how we should proceed while waiting for the fix 
from upstream.

Thanks,

Rafael