Quoting Vincent Bernat (2015-04-14 08:40:07) > ❦ 14 avril 2015 11:00 +1000, Ben Finney <ben+deb...@benfinney.id.au> : > >>>> I presume that we can agree that, if someone started offering a web >>>> service compiling C code with output an order of magnitude better >>>> in every dimension than gcc can achieve, we still wouldn't use it >>>> for our binaries (at least not unless it were available as free >>>> software that we could host ourselves). What makes JavaScript >>>> worthy of special treatment? >>> >>> It is an interpreted language and "compiled" source can sometimes be >>> considered as a pristine source too (for example, concatenation). >> >> No, a concatenated bundle – the compiled form – is not the preferred >> form for making modifications to the work. So it's not the source >> form. > > Sorry, that's not always true. The concatenated form may not be the > preferred form for making modifications for the upstream author but > for a user, this may be perfectly valid. The prefered form of > modification of the derivative may become the concatenated form. Or > the selected form. License-wise, those derivatives are still perfectly > valid since usually, all this is MIT-licensed.
Licensing is not the only reason for Debian packaging rules. Some binary blobs are freely licensed too, but still unsuitable for Debian main. - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
