Re: jquery debate with upstream
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 12:58:51PM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> I have a completely different approach to the DFSG. The DFSG is not
> carefully drafted document and it doesn't stand up to detailed
> legalistic interpretation. Rather, it is a statement of aims and
> values.
That was certainly how I remember the crafting of it as well.
Removing source files you don't use seems very, well, meta to me.
Once all other problems are solved and we've got nothing to do, perhaps
then we should look at it.
It provides no benefit except work for developers.
FWIW, I think the concept of a graphic needing its source is also bogus.
It means that the upstream have to hang onto some script they might of
used once years ago for.. what reason?
To give you a concrete example, I made the SPI logo (and I think it is
the current one, it looks like it) using gimp and some sort of lisp script.
I don't have that script anymore, does that make the logo non-free?
Should that change the status of the graphic?
If, instead of a script I manually typed/moused the commands, does that
change the status?
- Craig
--
Craig Small (@smallsees) http://enc.com.au/ csmall at : enc.com.au
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/ csmall at : debian.org
GPG fingerprint: 5D2F B320 B825 D939 04D2 0519 3938 F96B DF50 FEA5
Reply to: