Minified javascript files
 

On Aug 16, Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> wrote:

> I know this is tedious but what others think about this matter?
This is another case in which the DFSG has become a religion to be
followed in a literalist interpretation instead of a tool to be used
for the purpose of advancing software freedom.

--
ciao,
Marco


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120816185955.GA1962@bongo.bofh.it">http://lists.debian.org/20120816185955.GA1962@bongo.bofh.it

Minified javascript files
 

On 08/16/2012 08:59 PM, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 16, Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> wrote:
>
>> I know this is tedious but what others think about this matter?
> This is another case in which the DFSG has become a religion to be
> followed in a literalist interpretation instead of a tool to be used
> for the purpose of advancing software freedom.

I rarely share Marco's opinion, but this time I do.

A way around removing the files would be to ask upstream to add the original
(big) sources and some way to generate the shipped small files out of them, like
a makefile/whatever which does the job. Then the miniaturized version comes with
their original source (yet another copy of...) and everybody would be happy.


--
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 502D63DA.4000502@bzed.de">http://lists.debian.org/502D63DA.4000502@bzed.de

Minified javascript files
 

Le Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 07:24:32PM +0200, Vincent Bernat a écrit :
>
> On the behalf of the FTP master team, Ansgar Burchardt explained me why
> the dependency to libjs-jquery is not enough to fulfill the "provide the
> sources" part since the source in the archive may not correspond to the
> version included in the upstream tarball.
>
> I agree with the rationale. However, here is mine:
>
> 1. The license allows redistribution and modification of the minified
> version without having the sources. Therefore, we are only dealing
> with DFSG here.
> 2. The package does not need the shipped minified version to work
> correctly. We replace it with another minified version from another
> package. This may mean that from the point of view of the
> package, the sources provided in libjs-jquery is "equivalent" to the
> sources that would have been provided with the package.
> 3. Repacking the original tarball just to remove those files is extra
> work.
>
> I know this is tedious but what others think about this matter?

Hi Vincent,

I also find this rule tedious and demotivating. Also, I regularly see people
losing their time uploading repacked sources that are not binary identical to
the ones in our archive (repacking scripts can not guarantee this), or fighting
with pristine-tar branches in Git. In the case of sourceless redistributable
files, I would prefer to save my time by ignoring them.

Have a nice day,

--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120816212631.GA31644@falafel.plessy.net">http://lists.debian.org/20120816212631.GA31644@falafel.plessy.net

Minified javascript files
 

On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Vincent Bernat wrote:

> What I didn't know until recently is that the minified version in the
> source package should be removed (or the appropriate full version should
> be appended).

Do we also require that for say, precompiled DLLs of GTK+ or SDL for
Windows platforms?

--
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAKTje6GC0=kw=C=Y6PJtFcGtZFzsujQmyvNJyCFuEAtvnUS4s w@mail.gmail.com

Minified javascript files
 

On 08/17/2012 01:24 AM, Vincent Bernat wrote:
> 3. Repacking the original tarball just to remove those files is extra
> work.
>
Yeah, just annoying everyone for a minified jquery in upstream
tarball is, to me, a bit too extreme to my taste as well, as we all know
where it's coming from, and even it would be possible to check that
its hash. However, I do respect this view, and I think you should as well.
I do not agree that this is so much work, once it is automated. Doing it
*once*, for example as a debian/rules target to produce the orig.tar.xz,
makes it manageable. Extra bonus points if on top of this, it makes you
use xz strong compression instead of less compressing gz / bz2.

Cheers,

Thomas


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 502DD449.30708@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/502DD449.30708@debian.org

Minified javascript files
 

* Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org>, 2012-08-16, 19:24:
1. The license allows redistribution and modification of the minified
version without having the sources. Therefore, we are only dealing with
DFSG here.


While jQuery license is permissive, it does impose certain conditions[0]
on distributors. In my experience, upstreams often fail to fulfil these
requirements.


3. Repacking the original tarball just to remove those files is extra
work.


Part of the problem is that we lack good tools to do this extra work for
us. Really, repacking shouldn't be a tedious operation, it shouldn't
take more than 5 seconds, it shouldn't require writing two dozens lines
of code and documentation. :(



[0] “The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.�


--
Jakub Wilk


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120817073904.GA3971@jwilk.net">http://lists.debian.org/20120817073904.GA3971@jwilk.net

Minified javascript files
 

On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 08:59:55PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> On Aug 16, Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org> wrote:
>
> > I know this is tedious but what others think about this matter?
> This is another case in which the DFSG has become a religion to be
> followed in a literalist interpretation instead of a tool to be used
> for the purpose of advancing software freedom.

I'd regard using an untouched source and using just the Debian packaged
version of the library (and thus ignoring the upstream shiped copy /
minimisation in the binary package) as "common sense". IMHO DFSG should
not conflict with common sense and if this is the case we might consider
fixing it.

Kind regards

Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120817082412.GC2075@an3as.eu">http://lists.debian.org/20120817082412.GC2075@an3as.eu

Minified javascript files
 

On 08/17/2012 09:39 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
> * Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org>, 2012-08-16, 19:24:
>> 1. The license allows redistribution and modification of the minified
>> version without having the sources. Therefore, we are only dealing
>> with DFSG here.
>
> While jQuery license is permissive, it does impose certain conditions[0]
> on distributors. In my experience, upstreams often fail to fulfil these
> requirements.
>
>> 3. Repacking the original tarball just to remove those files is extra
>> work.
>
> Part of the problem is that we lack good tools to do this extra work for
> us. Really, repacking shouldn't be a tedious operation, it shouldn't
> take more than 5 seconds, it shouldn't require writing two dozens lines
> of code and documentation. :(

But it usually does and also results in a source tarball which is
missing essential pieces of the software, so people who download it for
non-Debian usage will fail to run the shipped source just because we
removed an otherwise free piece of software.


> [0] “The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be
> included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.�
>


--
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org
GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 502E0675.3040008@bzed.de">http://lists.debian.org/502E0675.3040008@bzed.de

Minified javascript files
 

On 08/17/2012 09:40 AM, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Vincent Bernat wrote:
>
>
>> What I didn't know until recently is that the minified version in the
>> source package should be removed (or the appropriate full version should
>> be appended).
>>
> Do we also require that for say, precompiled DLLs of GTK+ or SDL for
> Windows platforms?
>
I had the OpenSSL dll for windows embedded in one of my source packages,
because there was some windows software together with it. I had to remove
it completely, as I was asked to have the source code for it, and I found
ridiculous to embed the sources of OpenSSL too.

So yes, we have the problem for precompiled windows DLLs in a source
package.

Thomas


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 502E09BF.9030308@debian.org">http://lists.debian.org/502E09BF.9030308@debian.org

Minified javascript files
 

Hi there!

On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:53:09 +0200, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> On 08/17/2012 09:39 AM, Jakub Wilk wrote:
>> * Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org>, 2012-08-16, 19:24:
>>> 3. Repacking the original tarball just to remove those files is extra
>>> work.
>>
>> Part of the problem is that we lack good tools to do this extra work for
>> us. Really, repacking shouldn't be a tedious operation, it shouldn't
>> take more than 5 seconds, it shouldn't require writing two dozens lines
>> of code and documentation. :(
>
> But it usually does and also results in a source tarball which is
> missing essential pieces of the software, so people who download it for
> non-Debian usage will fail to run the shipped source just because we
> removed an otherwise free piece of software.

I fully agree with Bernd here: if what we want to remove is under a free
license, then I would not repack the original tarball simply because we
do not use it.

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca