Re: [INPUT REQUESTED] Fedora Policy on generated code

2015-12-21 Thread Vít Ondruch
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 For Ruby, regenerating all the generated content would be a huge burden. I can't really imagine the Ruby bootstrap, since you need to have Ruby to build Ruby, I don't think we can identify every piece which is/was generated nor we can collect the or

Re: [INPUT REQUESTED] Fedora Policy on generated code

2015-12-21 Thread Florian Weimer
On 12/18/2015 08:13 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > * Code that was pre-generated by upstream may have been done with > build flags that differ from Fedora's own set of hardened and > optimized flags, resulting in a poorer experience (or less secure It might also be interesting to talk to people i

Re: [INPUT REQUESTED] Fedora Policy on generated code

2015-12-21 Thread Alexander Bokovoy
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015, Stephen Gallagher wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Please keep responses on the devel@ list. CCed to the Council list for visibility and discussion of how this fits with our "Freedom" foundation. == Premise == Some upstream distribute tarballs that incl

Re: [INPUT REQUESTED] Fedora Policy on generated code

2015-12-19 Thread Richard W.M. Jones
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 02:13:54PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > 1) Do we require that the original data used to generate this code is > included in the SRPM? Yes. This seems like a widely accepted principle in the free software world. eg. The GNU GPL contains this phrase: "The source code f

Re: [INPUT REQUESTED] Fedora Policy on generated code

2015-12-18 Thread Ian Kent
On Sat, 2015-12-19 at 00:34 +0100, Lars Seipel wrote: > There may be reasonable exceptions, but I'd consider them pretty > rare. > Even outside of the context of licensing, I think the concept of > "preferred form for modification" is a useful one here. That's what > should be in the SRPM and shoul

Re: [INPUT REQUESTED] Fedora Policy on generated code

2015-12-18 Thread Lars Seipel
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 02:13:54PM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote: > 2) Do we require that whatever tools are necessary to generate this > code is packaged in Fedora (with all the legal and policy requirements > that this implies)? If we do not, do we require that the code used by > upstream is fre

Re: [INPUT REQUESTED] Fedora Policy on generated code

2015-12-18 Thread Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
I think that there are few "classes" of pregenerated code (depending on what it is used for) that deserve completely different handling. 0. Build scripts 1. Documentation, artwork, fonts, and other "content" 2. Anything code that is executed by users For clases 0. and 1. we have to be able to ver