[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: jquery debate with upstream



]] Russ Allbery 

> Lars Wirzenius <liw@liw.fi> writes:
> > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 01:20:20AM +0100, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> 
> >> Actually, if we really want to strictly +literally interpret the DFSG,
> >> then yes, tarballs (or the directory trees they represent) are no
> >> longer "the preferred form of modification" when everybody uses a DVCS
> >> like git.
> 
> > I don't think this makes sense. The tarball has never been the source:
> > the files contained in the tarball are the source. The tarball is merely
> > a container for them. Likewise, a version control system can be
> > considered a container.
> 
> I think it's more that one can argue that the preferred form of
> modification includes revision history, the branch structure, historical
> tags, and so forth.

Yup, I don't think anybody is actually particularly hung up about
whether it's a git repo or something else, as long as the semantics are
preserved and it's easily consumable using standard tools.  (So a git or
bzr repo are both ok, a Visual Sourcesafe or Perforce repo less so.)

-- 
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are


Reply to: