Op woensdag 7 mei 2014 23:18:00 schreef Ben Finney: > Wouter Verhelst <w...@uter.be> writes: > > The point is, I'm having a hard time buying the argument that if the > > minified javascript was unmodified, and if the non-minified javascript > > library is in the archive (or a version of said javascript library > > which will function in exactly the same way), that the minified > > javascript is suddenly non-free because it does not contain the > > non-minified version in the *same* source tarball. > > No-one AFAIK is making that argument, so that hopefully sets your mind > at ease. > > > For the very same reason we accept built-using and *- source packages, > > I don't see a problem with having a minified javascript library in a > > source tarball *as long as the source is in Debian*, somewhere. > > Agreed, if that can be known with confidence at least as good as the > very simple and reliable method of removing the non-source form out of > the Debian source package. > > > The point of freedom is to allow people to make changes, not to have a > > pedantically correct version of every bit of source "out there". > > The point of freedom is more than merely to make changes; it is the > freedom to inspect the work and see what it does, it is the freedom to > share the work with others in the same freedom as the original.
Yes, that too. My point was that we should consider *why* we want source. If the source is elsewhere available, then it is available, and it does not matter that it is not available in the "current" source package. > > So long as people can make such changes without too much effort (and I > > submit that in the case of minified javascript libraries without > > non-minified version, they can), I don't see what the problem is. > > So that I understand your position: You're saying a recipient of Debian > who obtains, from the Debian source package, a minified JavaScript file > *without* corresponding source, has effective freedom to modify that > work? No. But I agree that my above sentence could have been written with some more care; I should have cleared up my braindump a bit better. Allow me to rephrase: I submit that in the case of minified javascript libraries that are *already available* in Debian, and that are symlinked (in the way as described before) but ship in a source tarball as convenience copies *which are not used*, they can. It is easy to verify whether such minified javascript libraries are used: if the binary package does not ship with them, they are not used, even if they are in the source package. > > [...] > > > > > How can we verify which [non-source JavaScript libraries] are > > > verbatim copies [from a work for which we demonstrably have source], > > > automatically for every release of the source package? > > > > If you must, you could take a checksum and build a database of known- > > unmodified versions. I'm not convinced that's actually useful, > > however. > > If you must, that could work. That's more complex and less reliable than > simply omitting the non-source form of the work. They need not be removed from the source package, IMO. [...] -- It is easy to love a country that is famous for chocolate and beer -- Barack Obama, speaking in Brussels, Belgium, 2014-03-26 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/2684636.6uzum2g...@grep.be