On May 2, 2014 5:43:30 PM EDT, Michael Banck <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 03:58:37PM -0400, Paul Tagliamonte wrote:
>> If the png was made from the svg, include the svg.
>Well, it is unclear who you are adressing here. If upstream made a
>from (prsumably) an .svg, but did not include the .svg in the tarball,
>how can the Debian maintainer include if they don't have access to it?
>I agree that when possible and feasable, the original source should be
>I just also tend to think then when upstream includes a PDF as very
>useful documentation, and it can be decuced from the layout that this
>was done by LaTeX or LibreOffice, but the respective source files are
>missing, our users are best served by including this PDF in this case
>(if there are no overriding licensing issues on top).
>It is ok to ask upstream if the maintainer wants to take that extra
>step, but I don't think it should be mandated.
>My 0.02 cents, anyway.
The works you describe aren't code, so there is an ambiguity between DFSG and the social contract that creates a difference of opinion about if these require source at all.
I believe it's important to keep these two issues separate in order to better resolve both of them.