Le Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 07:24:32PM +0200, Vincent Bernat a écrit :
> 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?
I also find this rule tedious and demotivating. Also, I regularly see people
losing their time uploading repacked sources that are not binary identical to
the ones in our archive (repacking scripts can not guarantee this), or fighting
with pristine-tar branches in Git. In the case of sourceless redistributable
files, I would prefer to save my time by ignoring them.
Have a nice day,
Debian Med packaging team,
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan