Re: Repackaging question
Arnaud Vandyck writes:
> On 12/6/06, Marcus Better <marcus@better.se> wrote:
> > Benjamin Mesing wrote:
> > > Generally speaking yes, but the Debian Java Policy suggests, that class
> > > files should be removed from upstream release [1].
> >
> > That advice is plain wrong. (And it's not part of the actual Java policy as
> > the page says.)
>
> No, it's not.
>
> It's a good idea to remove generated javadoc and jar files and classes.
Very much so. Unless you build from source, you have no way to know
that the binaries correspond to that source code. You can't even
guarantee that you're not violating the GPL, which requires you to
provide source code on demand.
> > Many Java packages come with jar files for dependencies,
> > i.e. external code where the source is not included in the
> > upstream tarball. Such binaries must be removed and the package
> > should then get a +dfsg suffix.
> >
> > However a .jar or .class file built from included source code
> > should not be removed (but obviously they must not be installed
> > in Debian, but rather the sources must be rebuilt).
>
> They can be removed to use less space and be sure not to include code
> that has been build with non free dependencies.
That too. This is all to do with basic free software hygiene.
Andrew.
Reply to: