On 08/17/2012 10:21 PM, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2012, Luca Falavigna wrote:
>> 2012/8/17 Bernd Zeimetz <email@example.com>:
>>> But it usually does and also results in a source tarball which is
>>> missing essential pieces of the software, so people who download it for
>>> non-Debian usage will fail to run the shipped source just because we
>>> removed an otherwise free piece of software.
>> This does not make sense if the removed pieces are useless, as the
>> core of this discussion is about.
> They are not useless if you take the pristine source which is the
> situation that was described by Bernd. When we remove files we often have
> to do supplementary modifications (debian/patches/ or add symlink at the
> proper place) to get the software to work again... for example changing
> the path where the libraries are expected to be found.
Also please remember the Social Contract:
Our priorities are our users and free software.
If I would remove an otherwise free piece of software I'm not using in
the binary package just because the original, non-minified version of it
is missing, I think that I would violate the SC. If the opinion of the
ftp-masters is different from mine I think we might need a GR to solve
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F