Hi fellow hackers,
I have noticed several times package changes like the following (from
cairomm entering testing today):
* debian/control:
- Drop build dependencies on doxygen and graphviz, since upstream
now ships the generated documentation
Feels wrong to me to redistribute when e.g. html files clearly are not
the preferred form of editing for upstream.
I also avoid redistributing PDF files provided by upstream - and in some
cases even strip it from redistributed source, as it is a binary thingy
which potentially may contain non-free code.
On the other hand, I often include graphics files even if those also are
binary and may potentially contain non-free code (although less likely).
Seems inconsistent to me.
Do we have some consensus on what is ok to redistribute as-is and what
not?
Or can some of you enlighten me with your personal reasoning for your
own packaging style?
Regards,
- Jonas
--
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
[x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature