Re: SF logo + CC0 license (upcoming octave-gnerate-html package)

[I am adding the mailing list of the Debian Octave Group to the Cc list.]

* John Scott <[email protected]> [2025-11-30 21:51]:

> I apologize that my tone may sound antagonistic; I'm struggling with my 
> words and want to give you a timely reply above all else.

No problem. I thank you for your prompt reply.

> This link has a typo:
>
>>  [1] https://gnu-octave.github.io/packages/generate-html/
>
> It should read as https://gnu-octave.github.io/packages/generate_html/

Correct.

> Anywho, that SourceForge logo is also a trademark. If use of the 
> SourceForge logo were necessary to convey something to a reader, then 
> that'd be one thing. However it doesn't appear Octave stuff even uses 
> SourceForge anymore, so to include the logo at all is potentially 
> misleading and doesn't serve a sensible purpose.
>
> I take it that you were referring to
>
> https://sourceforge.net/p/octave/generate_html/ci/default/tree/inst/of-website-files/footer.js
>
> and a code comment there says:
>
> // This function is in an extra file because it contains code specific to the hosting service.
>
> but once this is inside a Debian package, as opposed to being a page 
> hosted by SourceForge, the purpose breaks down.
>
> I must ask, is it necessary to ship the 'of-website-files' folder? From 
> skimming, it looks like that folder probably isn't relevant for 
> downstream users of octave-generate-html or any reverse dependencies it 
> may have. Instead, it appears that folder holds assets used to build 
> the former website at https://octave.sourceforge.io/ which now 
> proclaims that the Octave Forge isn't active anymore, and certainly not 
> on SourceForge. If that directory of the package is a time capsule of 
> information no longer true, it's hard for me to understand how it could 
> be of service to our users. How is this intended to be used? In their 
> code comment upstream demonstrated care in making it possible to remove 
> the SourceForge logo (by putting that code in a separate source file), 
> and our dilemma here seems exactly what that's intended to solve. In 
> other words, inclusion of the SourceForge logo seems unhelpful.

Yes, the generate_html package of Octave is intended for developers of 
Octave packages, not end users. This package can be used to generate 
web pages similar to this one: https://octave.sourceforge.io/arduino/index.html.

You are absolutely right in your analysis. The repository at 
octave.sf.net is deprecated. However, the generate_html package contains 
tools for doing other things. Just continue reading:

> Are there planned reverse dependencies of this package? How is it 
> intended to be used? If the code to include the SourceForge logo were 
> left in, would users ever see it in their use?

I forgot to mention this in my original post. I plan to package 
octave-generate-html because of its reverse dependency octave-quaternion 
(upcoming version 2.4.1). The quaternion package uses generate_html in 
order to produce its documentation in PDF form.

So, I think I have a plan: I will just remove the offending URL from 
footer.js and add a note to the README.Debian file. This should not 
affect the package's usability.

>>      [I] added the following stanza in debian/copyright for [the fixed.js file]:
>> 	Files: inst/of-website-files/fixed.js 
>> 	Copyright: 2009, Søren Hauberg <[email protected]> 
>> 	License: CC0 
>> 	 This file licensed under the CC0 license (see <https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/legalcode>), effectively placing it in the public domain.
>>
>> Is it correct?
>
> That is not the license, but only a statement identifying the license. It is conceptually similar to the GNU GPL verbage you're more likely familiar with:
>> You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License along with this program. If not, see <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
>
> Fortunately CC0-1.0 is shipped at /usr/share/common-licenses/CC0-1.0 so 
> after a paragraph break you can append a sentence along the lines of 
> "On Debian systems, the full text of the CC0 1.0 Universal license can 
> be found in "/usr/share/common-licenses/Apache-2.0"." version 2 can be 
> found in the file /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL-2.

Ok, thanks! I did not notice that CC0-1.0 was included in the base-files 
package.

Best,

Rafael Laboissière