Pau Garcia i Quiles <pgqui...@elpauer.org> writes: > While working today on Wt again, I've noticed if I were to repackage the > upstream tarball to remove jquery.min.js, I would also remove the > Doxygen-generated HTML apidox. After all, I'm also regenerating them, > therefore to me it's just a few thousands of useless files in upstream's > tarball. But what's FTP masters stance on this?
I don't think ftp-master particularly cares what additional scrubbing you do once you have to repackage upstream. If you don't have to repackage upstream, there's a strong preference that you don't do so, but once you go down that path, I don't think anyone is particularly concerned with what else you change provided that it's generally sensible. Either one can verify checksums with the upstream release or one can't. I drop the Windows code and the products of upstream's autogen.sh in one of my packages for similar reasons; it saves a few MB of archive space for code that's never used in Debian, and I have to repackage upstream anyway, so why not. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87vcga1p4c....@windlord.stanford.edu
