On Wed, 2016-07-13 at 10:43 -0500, Don Armstrong wrote: > Or are you asking us to potentially overrule the ftpmasters inclusion > of libjs-handlebars? Or potentially overrule the release managers > determination of whether this particular bug is RC or not? [...] > I'd certainly be more comfortable if the ftpmasters and release > managers would weigh in here.
On the concrete case of libjs-handlebars: the JS files we distribute seem to be generated by a parser-generator and thus certainly shouldn't qualify as source. I filed a seperate bug for this to keep it apart from the browserification issue, see [1]. [1] https://bugs.debian.org/830986 The ftp team can only catch shipping generated source by chance as we mostly just look at license headers. Avoiding such issues by using what upstream considers "source" already counts as a good reason to me. For the general case, I haven't yet looked into what "browserified" means exactly, but from skimming over the discussion on -devel@ it sounded like it was a glorified "cat"? In that case shouldn't one be able to easily use "cat" instead of "grunt" to build the package from the files upstream considers source? If it is more than "cat", some more information would be helpful. Ansgar
