Julien Cristau wrote: > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 13:18:41 +0900, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: > >> Thomas Goirand <tho...@goirand.fr> writes: >> >>> Ansgar Burchardt wrote: >>>> Thomas Goirand <tho...@goirand.fr> writes: >>> Are you 100% sure that's it is not including ONLY the binary? What in >>> the case where we ship also the source code like I did? Would that >>> change if I add the windows source code for OpenSSL (which I think would >>> be quite silly)? >> Yes, the problem is that it is not possible to make sure the source code >> belongs to the included binary. >> >>>> although there is a >>>> proposed GR [1] that suggests to change this (the GR also lists builds >>>> for Windows explicitly as an example). >>> But it doesn't talk about my specific case, where source of the windows >>> code is also present. >> It does. It mentions a build for Windows of the same program that will >> be included in Debian. In that case the source code for the program is >> present. >> >>> Just to let you know, I do believe that freeness is very important, and >>> I'm not trying to resist here, but trying to understand and find >>> solution. I'm happy you have sent this report, and now I realize that >>> you might be right (I still have to make sure of it), then find >>> solutions. So, thanks for this BTS entry, and I hope we can continue the >>> discussion until a solution may be found. I really want to keep the >>> windows binary. Maybe there's a way to have it built in Debian? Do you >>> know if there's the necessary tools in the archive? >> I don't see any use for the Windows binaries in the source archive as it >> is not included in any binary package and thus not readily available to >> users anyway. As it is intended for Windows users in any case, why not >> just include a link to an alternative download location? >> > Any progress on this? > > Cheers, > Julien
Hi Julien, As you may have seen, I've been working in closing the bugs for all dependencies of DTC one by one. I'm nearly done with it. As for DTC, the source binaries for the windows dynamic IP updater have been removed from our Git (it's now in a separate project). Our plan is to release the version 0.32.x, have it uploaded to SID, and then migrated to testing. The current version of DTC in SID and testing isn't at all a good fit for it. The latest version from our Git is a way better, with PHP 5.3.x fixes and all. I regret that we are 2 months late on this, I would have like to have it uploaded in SID before the freeze, but I believe uploading latest version from our Git and have it migrated to testing is still the best way to go right now. In fact, our plans is to release for both FreeBSD and Debian at the same time, and in the future, have both release in sync, because otherwise, it's quite painful. I wrote about it to another member of the release team, and he told me that this have been forwarded to all the release team. If it wasn't the case, then I can write to the debian-release list about it. Let me know. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
