On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Philipp Kern <p...@philkern.de> wrote: > Hi, > > > On 2014-03-11 00:09, Joachim Breitner wrote: >> >> Am Montag, den 10.03.2014, 20:29 +0100 schrieb Philipp Kern: >>> >>> as long as the code in question is not under a license that requires the >>> full, non-minified source to be reproduced and if the copyright notices >>> and license terms as potentially required by the license are present, I >>> don't see why not. But I guess the latter is not commonly happening? >> >> >> The most common case is that the file >> http://code.jquery.com/jquery-1.11.0.min.js >> is included without >> http://code.jquery.com/jquery-1.11.0.js >> >> The minified file contains a copyright header, and the license is MIT, >> so I believe shipping jquery-1.11.0.min.js without query-1.11.0.js is >> allowed. >> >> So you'd say it is acceptable to leave jquery-1.11.0.min.js in a tarball >> if it is unused (e.g. if it is removed in the clean target, and possibly >> documented in README.Source)? Can maybe someone from the ftp-team >> confirm this? > > > how bad would it be for those upstreams to just include an unused copy of > the non-minified version? Clearly it'd never be used by anything in the > upstream packaging because you almost always want to ship minified JS to > browsers in production. But if they already fetch the min and you have a > working relationship with upstream... maybe they're sympathetic.
>From upstream's point of view, it often comes down to "extra work and no gain". Avoiding busywork is a fairly compelling reason to not do something. > I still think it should be acceptable given that it's an open source > project, it's clearly versioned from which source it comes and we check by > not using the file that no changes have been done to the minification. I > guess we could even go one step further and argue that the source for this > is in fact in Debian. If we could generate the same minification result as > jquery upstream in Debian, all we'd "need" would be the equivalent of a > source-depends or a pointer in debian/copyright. It's not that we don't ship > its source, after all. My understanding is this is what the "Built-Using" field in debian/control is supposed to help with, although I don't think it's in widespread usage yet. Regards, Vincent -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caczd_tcpycsdqziub0pzrrzaqexgyd21k+v11ezkv6_9o16...@mail.gmail.com
