On Friday 07 September 2007 11:18:18 Edward Welbourne wrote: > > Can we still hope that there are requests from the Opera developers that > > a certain set of LGPL libraries are out there that should be distributed > > with Debian (which they are currently not or in a "wrong" version or > > missing patches) that would help to further reduce the footprint of the > > non-inspectable closed-source bits of the Opera Debian package? > > Since we dynamic link everything - except for the Qt in our > opera-static package - we simply use the dependency mechanisms in the > Debian package system to ensure the presence of the libraries on which > we depend, all of which are present in standard debian packages > already. So I don't think there's anything that fits your description > above. Again, if you believe otherwise, I'd be interested to know. I am not seeking for a violation of some license. It is "missed opportunities" for optimisation that I am after. You have the source, you seek for them :o) > > Or are there free tools you are developing with that should be part > > of Debian? > > Again, all the tools we use in development are present in Debian > already. In fact, in practice, the Unix team would not think of using > any tool *not* in Debian, simply because most of us use Debian boxes > as our main work-stations ;^) This sounds all very Debian-friendly to me. Please consider to maintain and/or co-maintain some free packages for the distribution and become a DD. It should not distract you much or at all from the work you are doing anyway. The DD application procedure may be perceived to take long when measured with the wall clock, the brain tick time should be negligible for you, so don't shy away, please. Cheers, Steffen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.