Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Vincent Bernat <email@example.com> writes:
>> On the behalf of the FTP master team, Ansgar Burchardt explained me why
>> the dependency to libjs-jquery is not enough to fulfill the "provide
>> the sources" part since the source in the archive may not correspond to
>> the version included in the upstream tarball.
>> I agree with the rationale. However, here is mine:
>> 1. The license allows redistribution and modification of the minified
>> version without having the sources. Therefore, we are only dealing
>> with DFSG here.
>> 2. The package does not need the shipped minified version to work
>> correctly. We replace it with another minified version from another
>> package. This may mean that from the point of view of the
>> package, the sources provided in libjs-jquery is "equivalent" to the
>> sources that would have been provided with the package.
>> 3. Repacking the original tarball just to remove those files is extra
>> I know this is tedious but what others think about this matter?
> Could this be solved via the Built-Using field? That indicates that
> you're embedding source from another package (in this case,
Oh, no, wait, never mind, that's only for binary packages, and the problem
you have is with the source package containing sources that are not in the
preferred form for modification. Yeah, I don't think there's a good
solution for that.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>