* Adrian Bunk:

> On Wed, Oct 05, 2016 at 10:00:53AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote:
>> I think it's clear that the TC believes that this package is not DFSG
>> free.
>> I think it's clear that the TC believes perl would be better if the
>> situation was improved.
>> I thought it was clear we believed perl had a DFSG issue, although IRC
>> discussion today makes that less clear.
>> I don't think the value of having the TC formally say any of those
>> specific things is very high.
> Please describe the relevant differences between browserified javascript 
> and perl that make the TC believe that the former has a DFSG issue but 
> the latter probably has not, in a way that I can deduct what the TC 
> would believe regarding the similiar problem related to SQLite.

Configure in Perl is a build tool, and appears amenable to manual

Browserified Javascript is hardly human-editable, and it is shipped as
part of built packages.  These scripts need regular maintenance, and
patching what is in Debian directly is too cumbersome.  I can't quite
understand why there is any debate that shipping these artifacts
without sources which are built at build time is in any way desirable.
If we don't build from source, how we are supposed to fix bugs?

(Pre-compiled C files from Vala sources have the same issue, I think.
Ocaml's bootstrapping from pre-compiled bytecode is slightly

Reply via email to