Re: jquery debate with upstream
Paul Tagliamonte writes ("Re: jquery debate with upstream"):
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 03:16:14PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > You have conspicuously failed to answer Jonas's question. What
> > objective does removing these files and repacking the tarballs serve ?
>
> We distribute source. The question is, do we want to distribute binaries
> in the source to which we have no, well, source. This means, do we want
> to break the DFSG on the distribution of source packages?
I don't think this is a significant breach of the DFSG.
The whole point of the project is to enhance people's software
freedom. Repackaging these tarballs to remove these useless and
unused files does not enhance anyone's freedom.
> > > Debian have a certain definition of Freedoms [...]
> >
> > Whose freedom is impaired, and in what way, by the presence of these
> > useless but ignored files in the tarball ?
>
> We distribute them. The challenge here is does anyone use them. I leave
> that question up to the reader.
Why would anyone take the Debian package and then go out of their way
to use sourceless files they find in it ? I don't think these kind of
hypotheticals are answering the question.
Repackaging these tarballs for this reason is utterly pointless.
No-one has been able to explain what the benefit is, to anyone. All
we get when we challenge it is, I'm sad to say, vague and abstract
responses like this one.
We should stop this makework and get on with doing something useful.
Ian.
Reply to: