* Ben Hutchings <email@example.com> [150902 10:12]:
> My preferred form is a git repository of code written in C, Python, or
> some other language I know. That doesn't mean that a tarball of
> Haskell code is non-free!
I can't tell whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me!
> The preferred form for modification is generally whatever form an
> upstream developer will load into a text editor or other interactive
> editing tool.
No, "A preferred form" is what upstream uses. The DFSG does not use the
term "THE preferred form", and I believe that was wise. There can be
multiple "preferred forms" for some software, and all are, in my
opinion, acceptable by the DFSG. The real question is whether it is
reasonable to expect someone who wishes to modify the software to
consider the form "source".
Again, this is specifically about the DFSG, not the whole Debian Social
This whole thread is about how Debian can conform to some points of the
DSC (e.g. points 4 and 2) by providing packages containing minified JS,
and still conform to the DFSG, and whether that means some packages that
are currently in main need to be moved to contrib or non-free. The
point of contention is not "should we package this software for the
benefit of our users" but whether the packages are allowed in main,
which is strictly based on whether or not they conform to the DFSG.