Stefano Zacchiroli writes ("Re: Minified javascript files"):
> The problem I see with it, is that it adds complexity to the judgement
> of whether something is suitable for a source package or not (on all
> actors involved: maintainer, ftp-masters, QA, bug reporters, etc.). With
> something like that we'll have 3 cases:
>
> - DFSG-free source[1] -> stay in the tarball, not hidden
> - non DFSG-free "binary" -> must be removed, via repacking
> - "binary" generated from DFSG-free source available elsewhere in the
> archive -> stay in the tarball, hidden at the dpkg-source level
That's not what I was proposing. I was proposing that we would treat
your 2nd and 3rd points identically. They would then be in our
archive in the .orig.tar.gz files.
If this is not ideologically[1] acceptable to other members of the
project in your third case, then I think we should not do it at all
even for the second case.
[1] NB I do not mean to use "ideological" in a pejorative way. I am
very comfortable with the idea that Debian might make decisions based
on ideology. The root question being discussed here is IMO
essentially ideological.
If we do decide that we must remove the non-free parts from the
tarballs, repacking upstream's sources, rather than just having them
removed by dpkg-source during unpack, then I certainly welcome the
provision of better tools to help with that.
Ian.
--
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/20540.41973.750949.958...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
