❦ 18 octobre 2016 23:01 +0200, Florian Weimer <f...@deneb.enyo.de> :

>>> 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
> patching.
> Browserified Javascript is hardly human-editable, and it is shipped as
> part of built packages.

I don't think this is the debate. The debate is around pre-minified
versions. Those versions are also human-editable and amenable to manual
... A solemn, unsmiling, sanctimonious old iceberg who looked like he
was waiting for a vacancy in the Trinity.
                -- Mark Twain

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to