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

Bug#346354: Is distribution of the maxdb-doc package a GPL violation?


I've read the whole bug log and though I'm not a regular on
debian-legal, I still would like to add a note to it:

I don't know what the current upstream does, but I wonder about one thing:
The header about the SAP Html Export indicates that the export happened
on 19.10.2004, about 1.5 years ago. If upstream really makes changes in
some other format but the HTML (which might still be possible), why
wasn't the file re-exported after that date?
I for one have seen quite a number of documents that were once generated
or exported from some source format A into some other easily modifiable
format B. And ever since, they have been kept up to date by editing the
exported format B files, while the (once original source) files in
format A lay rotting and are removed at some point (sometimes, but not
always directly after export). And I know a few such documents which
still have comments on them indicating that they were once exported by
some random tool.

So, who can say wether the exported HTML isn't now really the prefered
point of modification by upstream? Did the file change over time, though
the comment still indicated the same date&time of export? Though it's no
prerequisit, it would be a hint that upstream is indeed directly
modifying the HTML files instead of modifying some other source and then
re-exporting the files.


PS: I've subscribed to the bug, so no need to CC me on replies.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: