Re: Non-source Javascript files in upstream source
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 11:18:33AM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org> writes:
> > On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 06:40:26PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>
> >> I'm starting to get tempted. If we have a GR on it, regardless of the
> >> outcome, we can stop these arguments a bit sooner.
>
> > Please do note that this would be a GR to override a DPL delegated
> > team's decision[1], just to be absolutely clear.
Is there any disagreement about this? As far as I've understood so far, there
are only two points that keep being discussed:
1. Do we need to check that generated files which we don't use are actually
generated from the provided source? Main example here is a configure file
which gets overwritten during build.
2. What is source for a non-programmatic work such as a rendered bitmap of a
3-D model, do we require source for non-programmatic works, and if not, what
defines a programmatic work?
Neither of these is clarified by their recent statement.
> However, to put this issue to rest, the GR probably needs to amend the
> DFSG to make it unambiguous, so a 3:1 supermajority would be a good idea
> anyway.
That would be a good idea, but given the constant discussions and the vote in
2006[1], it seems doubtful whether we can get a simple majority on any point of
view in this matter. So it might be better to at least include an option which
makes the statement without modifying the DFSG.
Thanks,
Bas
[1] https://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_004
Reply to: