Re: is it a DFSG breach or not?
"Dmitry E. Oboukhov" <unera@debian.org> writes:
> JS - is an interpreter language, _theoretically_ it is possible to
> _restore_ the source, but if following DFSG then in fact the source is
> not included into archive. This is a bug of the Serious level (at least
> for Debian/main).
>
> Am I right? Please help me to make a decision: what is better to do?
It hinges on the definition of "source code" in DFSG #2. When this has
been discussed in the past, most DDs (in my read of the consensus) feel
that obfuscated source is not source code.
However, this isn't particularly serious obfuscation as obfuscation goes
(for example, there was no randomization of variable names). From your
description, it sounds like it may not even have been intended as
obfuscation: removing all whitespace and comments is a standard
compression method for web code to slightly reduce load times for
browsers. You could get back something that's human-editable source by
running it through an indentation program.
Given that, I think it's a judgement call. If you feel like there's
reasonable editable source there after running the Javascript through
something that indents it (I presume such things are available for
Javascript), then I'd call it okay if I were you. If you feel like the
source is too obfuscated to be usable, I'd decline to upload it if I were
you.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: