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

Re: scientific paper in package only in postscript form non-free?

tag 614525 - pending

Hi Joerg

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 09:26:33AM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> >> [...] It is doubtful that the PostScript files are
> >> the source code referred to by DFSG item 2. More likely is that the
> >> source files are TeX documents.
> > Cool, where is the agreed clearer version of DFSG 2 that says what it
> > means by source code?
> > I feel it's a grey area, so if the PS files aren't too difficult to
> > reconstruct, I'd still let them stay.
> Wouldnt pass NEW with *those* .ps only. Yes, PS can be source/preferred
> form for modification for stuff to, there are those people who write it
> directly, and thats fine. But in this case its pretty clear the source/preferred
> form for modification is a tex document, so we would request that.

Ok, thanks for too the point of view from ftp-masters. I have not
checked, it yet, but then the same problem may arise for 'multimix',
which I encountered as it FTBFS too due to missing 'ghostscript' for
ps2pdf in Build-Depends [1].

 [1] http://bugs.debian.org/618031

I have cancelled the NMU for the moment.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: