Ben Finney <email@example.com> writes:
> It seems to me that the primary objection to the presence of these files
> without source is that they are then distributed as part of Debian, in
> the source package. That violates our social contract.
The counter-argument from affected maintainers is that we *do* have the
source. It just happens to be in a different source package. We even
know that, because when we build the binary package we use the version of
There is therefore no *actual* violation of the social contract here, just
an inadequacy of bookkeeping.
Russ Allbery (firstname.lastname@example.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>