>> I found that in package qxmpp is used HTML documentation from upstream >> tarball. >> This documentation was not generated by doxygen during build process. Should >> I make a bug report? If yes, which section of Debian Policy I should point >> to? > > Well, there's nowhere in the DFSG or copyright (i'm assuming) > that says that it must be in some format X. If the original source is, > in fact, HTML, there's no problem. > > The idea is that you communicate the program in a preferable format > which can be used (or in some cases, actually is) the thing you > distribute. > > If the docs were generated, and they have a better source format, you > should encourage them to use that. > > The relevant Debian policy is DFSG point 2[1] (Must include source code) :)
Thank you for a reply. Perhaps I wrote unclear. In few steps: 1) There is some HTML documentation [1] in upstream tarball. 2) This documentation was generated using Doxygen. 3) This documentation was packaged in package libqxmpp-doc as is. 4) I can not find in tarball the necessary sources for Doxygen and instructions how to generate this documentation manually. The question is: should I make a bug report in this case? I am not subscribed to debian-devel list, so I've asked here. Best regards, Boris [1] http://qxmpp.googlecode.com/svn-history/tags/qxmpp-0.4.0/doc/html/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/69811334841...@web30e.yandex.ru
