Re: jquery debate with upstream
On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Paul Wise writes:
>> As far as I can tell, not modifying the DSFG at the same time was an
>> oversight. Fixing that mistake was attempted in a later GR but that was
>> blocked with a narrow margin.
> That GR proposal does not require source for non-programmatic works. It
> only "strongly recommends" it, and says explicitly that such source
> doesn't have to be in the archive.
Interesting, I must have glossed over that as I was on VAC at the time.
I note that the ftpmasters currently reject packages that are missing
source for non-programmatic works (REJECT-FAQ explicitly mentions
PS/PDF documentation). So the current archive requirements are in
practice stricter than the DFSG and the attempted DFSG clarification