Re: Are source packages required to be DFSG-free? (was: Re: New bugs filed regarding non-free IETF RFC/I-Ds)
Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=390664
> (please read it first)
Oh crap, it's a maintainer who thinks calling other people Nazis is
a good idea in debian/changelog. Defamation or what?
There's also some documentation-in-the-source-is-not-source nonsense.
> The problem is essentially, if I understood it correctly, whether
> Debian source packages [in main] must be DFSG-free or not, or whether
> it is sufficient that Debian binary packages [in main] must be
> DFSG-free and that the source package is "legally distributable".
>
> I'm not sure what the policy is here. I thought the Debian Policy was
> that source packages must be DFSG-free too, but I can't find a precise
> quotation in the Debian Policy Manual and point to it.
http://www.fr.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-archive.html#s-main says
"Every package in main must comply with the DFSG (Debian Free Software
Guidelines)." (in s2.2.1)
That is not limited to binary packages. If a maintainer is trying to
put DFSG-breaking material in their package, they will often have an
incorrect/incomplete debian/copyright (s4.5) too, which you can open
as another serious bug if you want.
I'm not sure where the idea that debian's source should be the upstream
source came from. debian/rules get-orig-source is a good idea (s4.9)
and that explicitly states it "does any necessary rearrangement".
Challenge maintainers for the sources of their "controlling guidelines"
when they try that sort of hand-waving, especially if they're
challenging you for sources and you're giving them.
Hope that helps,
--
MJR/slef
My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/
Please follow http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct
Reply to: