On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Russ Allbery <email@example.com> wrote:
> I think the debate in this thread is about whether it makes sense to
> require removing the minimized version from the upstream source when we
> don't install that file or otherwise use it in the binary package (because
> the binary package depends on the separately-packaged version of the same
> version and fully satisfies the DFSG).
That's exactly the point
IMHO, it's just one more useless file in upstream's tarball.
While working today on Wt again, I've noticed if I were to repackage
the upstream tarball to remove jquery.min.js, I would also remove the
Doxygen-generated HTML apidox. After all, I'm also regenerating them,
therefore to me it's just a few thousands of useless files in
upstream's tarball. But what's FTP masters stance on this?
Pau Garcia i Quiles
(Due to my workload, I may need 10 days to answer)