Re: distributing precompiled binaries
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 08:55:27AM +0000, MJ Ray wrote:
> Steve Langasek <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 09:51:46AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > > The PDF needs to come with sources to build the corresponding PDF
> > > *using only free software in Debian*, or it's not acceptable for
> > > Debian.
> > > The same needs to be true of any binary in Debian, AIUI.
> > The DFSG does not say this. Source is only mandatory for programs under the
> > DFSG as written.
> That's taking the example from the explanation to be the complete
It's reading the text of the actual guideline instead of making inferences
based on the title.
> Also, a PDF is a program for a certain type of interpreter.
A PDF as a program is its own source. You're talking about the preferred
format for modification of *documentation*, not a program. There's no
reason to expect that two different versions of mumble2pdf are going to
output two *programs* that resemble one another in the slightest - only that
they output the same documentation.
And this has all been discussed before.
> The "Source missing" entry in the REJECT-FAQ is "Your packages
> contains files that need source but do not have it. These include PDF
> and PS files in the documentation."
A recent (Dec 2008) addition with no grounding in the DFSG. If I see PDFs
being rejected with this rationale when it's not a question of license
compliance (PDFs distributed under the GPL certainly have to have source
with them, but that's not a DFSG matter), I certainly intend to dispute it.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/