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

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.


[1] https://www.debian.org/vote/2006/vote_004

Reply to: