Re: Minified files and source code requirement
- To: Debian Devel <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: Minified files and source code requirement
- From: Bernd Zeimetz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 11:28:21 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 4EB11B45.email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: <20111027010312.GD30617@merveille.plessy.net>
- References: <20111026170814.GA28720@rivendell.home.ouaza.com> <20111027010312.GD30617@merveille.plessy.net>
On 10/27/2011 03:03 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 07:08:14PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit :
>> But with more liberal licenses, we should certainly accept that the
>> minified files are their own sources much like we accept any other blob of
>> data under a free license.
> Hello Raphaël and everybody,
> to know what they really do. Are they really what the upstream author thinks
> they are, or was he tricked in cut-and-pasting a fake version containing a
> spyware ?
> On the other hand, if the minified file you would like to distribute matches
> exactly a minified file that has been distributed by Debian in the past, then
> indeed, why not running that version ? You are an experienced developer and I
> trust you to understand, balance and negociate the costs and benefits on a
> case-by-case basis.
Because even the old minified version should not have been distributed
unless we have the not minified version available (at least in the
source of the package), too?
> For the compliance with DFSG – and this is the main message here – we could
> reach it considering all the packages that are part of the same release, by
> using the dpkg source format 3.0 (git), which would be an efficient way to
> distribute past source versions and point at the preferred one at the same
How the source is distributed does not matter. Please don't abuse this
for yet another dpkg 3.0 git discussion.
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
GPG Fingerprints: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F