On 2011-10-27, Russ Allbery <r...@debian.org> wrote: > In other words, given the haziness in this area and the wildly divergent > practices of people when creating non-code works, I think we should look > at whether the provided "source" provides reasonable opportunity to meet > the core definition of free software, namely the ability to study and > adopt the work for one's own purposes and republish one's modifications, > and not get too hung up on whether the exact tools and steps the original > author took are included.
What about a game that provides a set of resource source files but no scripts to create the actual pngs and jpegs? As long as you just the tools (Blender, Gimp and such, Ogre 3D tools) you can sort of get the original dump out. As long as I ship those resources unused as a separate orig tarball, would that be acceptable enough for inclusion into Debian? They are actually in a separate repository, but it does get tagged for releases. (And yes, that's a real-world example[0]. I asked some people, pabs among them, on #-games some months ago, and the consensus seemed to be that everything needs to be regeneratable by scripts. The license in question is ISC, not GPL.) Kind regards Philipp Kern [0] https://launchpad.net/~openclonkdevteam/+archive/release -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnjajn4g.es3.tr...@kelgar.0x539.de
