On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 09:47:09AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > Le Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 02:42:51PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit : > > > > On the contrary, I'm against point (2) of the GR. I do consider our > > source packages to be part of Debian and hence subject to DFSG. If > > something in upstream tarball is non-free, I believe we should do > > repacking (there, we might use a bit more standardization on how we > > implement get-orig-source in such cases, but that's a different > > issue). In fact, doing that might even be a way to push our upstream to > > get rid of those non-free bits from their tarballs as well. > > Hi Stefano, > > I explained in my GR proposition what led me to conclude that not everything > in the original archives distributed usptream is a source for Debian. Let's > take a non-free RFC for example, that is not distributed in a binary package > and is not touched at build time. Why do you think it is part of the source > of the Debian operating system? Because it's in the source. If you do a 'find $source -iname '*rfc*', you will find it (unless the file has a silly name). More importantly, leaving files in the source package that must not be in the binary package increases the risk that a future NMU'er might miss the fact that this file is non-free and remove a --disable-foo option from the configure line in debian/rules, or something similar, thereby making the package in breach of the DFSG. I agree that it's a lot of work that might seem pointless and is not fun. But nobody ever said that working on Debian was going to be fun *all* the time. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature