Re: Debian violates GPL?
John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> writes:
> Yes, -kb. Incidentally, your idea also has serious trouble with packages
> that use CVS upstream. Many have $Id$ or similar tags in them, and some
> even have CVS directories in the tar. (mozilla is one, IIRC)
When is it a good idea to have CVS directories in the distribution
tarfile? That seems like a misuse of CVS to me.
Anyway, I'm dropping the CVS discussion now. I've said what I wanted
to say, and it looks like people think it's a bad idea. I wasn't
really set on it. I just thought it was worth consdidering.
For all those who brought up the "hard to mirror/access" arguments. I
think you missed my point. I was proposing something that could be
used to provide a service *in addition* to our ftp site, a service
that I suspect ftp could only provide at substantially greater
expense.
No one (except for those trying to get stuff that just doesn't exist
in our current setup) would have to ever see or use the CVS archive,
and it wouldn't need to be mirrored everywhere.
The arguments about pristine tarfiles were (as far as I'm concerned)
the strong ones.
--
Rob Browning <rlb@cs.utexas.edu> PGP=E80E0D04F521A094 532B97F5D64E3930
Reply to: