On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 11:15:20PM +0100, Francesco Poli wrote: > On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:16:46 +0000 Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > If we actually upheld this standard at present, it would result in us
> > removing a large number of packages from Debian.
> I think that these issues are sarge-ignore because of GR2004-004, but
> will be release-critical bugs post-Sarge.
GR-2004-003 changed the text of the social contract, it did not change the
text of the DFSG.
Point 2 of the DFSG still says
2. Source Code
The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in
source code as well as compiled form.
You've got a bit of work ahead of you if you want to show that a clause that
explicitly says "the program", "source code", and "compiled form" applies to
works that aren't programs and lack any traditional distinction between
source and compiled forms.
To be precise, since I went so far as to second GR-2004-003 and do not share
this interpretation of its meaning, if you expect this to be
release-critical for etch you will need to pass a GR that clarifies the DFSG
in this (IMHO detrimental to Debian) manner, get the ftpmasters to overrule
me by removing such packages from main, or get the DPL to appoint a new RM.
--
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
