#1066808 ITP: gtk-gnutella -- The Most Efficient Gnutella Client

Package:
wnpp
Source:
wnpp
Submitter:
Lucio Marinelli
Date:
2025-11-29 16:54:38 UTC
Severity:
normal
#1066808#5
Date:
2024-03-13 18:52:30 UTC
From:
To:
* Package name    : gtk-gnutella
   Version         : 1.2.3
   Upstream Author : Raphael Manfredi
* URL             : https://gtk-gnutella.sourceforge.io
* License         : GPL
   Programming Lang: C++
   Description     : P2P Gnutella server/client

This is the follow-up of bug
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1065479

gtk-gnutella is a server/client for the Gnutella peer-to-peer network.
It was previously included in Debian repository.
The source code is hosted in Github:
https://github.com/gtk-gnutella/gtk-gnutella
I already prepared the .deb package here:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/gtk-gnutella/files/gtk-gnutella/1.2.3/
#1066808#8
Date:
2024-03-14 13:29:25 UTC
From:
To:
I took a peek, out of curiosity. I was surprised not to find a
orig.tar.gz /  debian.tar.gz split; the package version scheme
properly reflects a normal (non-native) package (1.2.3-1), but
the source tarball has "./debian" in it;  and indeed, it looks
like you're managing the debian packaging in the upstream repo.
It's advisable to keep the two separate.

The debian/copyright file doesn't conform to spec[1], and doesn't
describe the copyright of the debian files in particular. I couldn't
easily answer the question: is your packaging based on the previous
iteration of the debian package? Do the previous packagers hold
copyright?


[1] https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
#1066808#17
Date:
2024-03-29 01:28:44 UTC
From:
To:
Hello,

Not everyone agrees with this.  I think that same repo, non-native
versioning is often what's best for a package.
#1066808#20
Date:
2024-03-29 01:44:13 UTC
From:
To:
While it's true that some people do hold that position, the problem with
it has always been that it gets extremely cumbersome the moment that
maintenance of the Debian packaging passes to somebody who doesn't have
upstream commit access.  This event is traditionally followed by
cursing.
#1066808#23
Date:
2024-03-29 04:03:59 UTC
From:
To:
Hello,

I've been on both sides of this -- upstream maintainer doing Debian
packaging, and adopting a package previously maintained by its
upstream -- and I really appreciated the simplicity in the former role,
and found it just one of the various small tasks involved in adopting
the package in the latter role.  I think it's easier now we treat source
packages as an output format, thanks to git.