Russ Allbery, le lun. 30 mars 2020 13:32:05 -0700, a ecrit: > Samuel Thibault <sthiba...@debian.org> writes: > > > Concerning base64-encoded text files, it's quite borderline. Possibly > > some editor do support opening base64-encoded files, then it's fine to > > have this as source code. Otherwise I don't see it as the preferred > > format for modifications. > > This is not what preferred form of modification means, as I think is > apparent from the fact that we distribute tarballs that cannot be opened > directly by most editors.
No but you can double-click on the tarball and an unpacker will happily show you the content. > I do understand the desire to have the URL in a form that's easily > searchable, but I don't think people are thinking through the implications > of saying we're not allowed to distribute sources even in formats that are > round-trip convertable to editable formats, but have to ensure every > artifact is in a form that can be *directly* edited. The implications for > the archive would be massive busywork that would have no significant > impact on software freedom. That, however, I do buy as an argument :) Samuel
