> > 1. Explicitly allow packaging of programs that include all required > > dependencies (convenience copies, vendoring), provided that > > licenses and DFSG are respected. > > Quick question (not hostile, just to clear it up): you do realize that > this means that the package's copyright file would need to document > all the licenses of all the bundled packages, right? At the very least > to provide enough information for users and downstream distributions.
Quick answer: yes, I do realize that. For such packages, debian/copyright would obviously need to mention or include the licence information for every bundled component. So the maintainer's work in that area would certainly increase. But if they add all those libraries as separate packages, they have to do that work ANYWAY. For example, that is what the maintainer did when libtorrent21t64 was first added to Debian. That was in 2018, and since then only one program in the archive has depended on that library: rtorrent. Question: if the rtorrent maintainer (the package is in the repo since 2017) had not split the package in two and had left rtorrent as a single binary with everything in one, who would have lost? Nobody. Who would have gained? Perhaps Jonathan McDowell would have had some time left for one more package in Debian. Who knows? -- . ''`. Dmitry E. Oboukhov <[email protected]> : :’ : <[email protected]> `. `~’ work: <[email protected]> `- 71ED ACFC 6801 0DD9 1AD1 9B86 8D1F 969A 08EE A756
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
