2008/12/15 Bill Allombert <bill.allomb...@math.u-bordeaux1.fr>: > It is under the GNU GPL but it is certainly generated from the TeX > documentation using the script 'etc/convert.pl' in the GAP tool package, > so the HTML is not "the preferred form of the work for making > modifications to it.". For a software to be in main, the Debian policy > requires that it can be build from source in main, else it must go in > contrib.
The .orig.tar.gz tarball that comes with Debian (at least for the last packaged release of GAP) comes without this pregenerated HTML that the upstream tarball comes with. Does this mean you removed the upstream HTML when you packaged the tarball? If so, please indicate this somehow in README.Debian. I understand that the HTML is generated in a non-free way, but why does that make the resulting product non-free? Upstream is distributing the HTML, it's placing the HTML under the GPL, the HTML can be modified because it's a transparent format, so why can't we interpret the HTML itself to be the preferred form of modification? It's not as if upstream can violate their own license, so shouldn't we interpret upstream's distribution of the HTML as saying that the HTML itself is source? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
