Le 24 octobre 2019 19:12:22 GMT+02:00, Pirate Praveen <prav...@onenetbeyond.org> a écrit : > > >On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 19:05, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: >> Quoting Pirate Praveen (2019-10-24 18:42:17) >>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 16:19, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk >>> <mailto:d...@jones.dk>> wrote: >>> > Quoting Pirate Praveen (2019-10-24 15:34:15) >>> >> All files derived from source have their corresponding source >>> code >>> >> and it is regenerated during build. >>> > >>> > It may very well be "source" but not "upstream source". >>> > >>> >>> Then I fail to see how this is a serious bug. >> >> I listed Policy § 2.1 as being the reason for severity of this bug. >> >> Let me quote the part I find relevant: >> >>> The program must include source code, and must allow distribution >in >>> source code as well as compiled form. >> >> If this package _does_ contain source code but just from a >_different_ >> upstream project than the one currently listed in debian/copyright >> then >> the bug is easily fixed by simply correcting what upstream project >> this >> package claims to ship source code from. > >Lets ask the team what they think about the issue. > >Hi js-team, > >Do you think this is really an rc bug? Do you think Source field in >debian/copyright should be changed to >https://github.com/lodash/lodash/releases ? > >Thanks >Praveen
+1 minor/normal