On Sat, May 07, 2016 at 08:36:25PM +0100, Justin B Rye wrote: > Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: > > Holger Wansing wrote: > >> <p>Some packages are only distributed as source code due to the > >> restrictions > >> in their licenses. Notably, one such package is <tt>pine</tt>, see > >> <ref id="pine"> for more information. > >> > >> So if we remove pine from the doc, we need another example for such > >> nonfree software, which is only allowed to be distributed as source code. > >> Is anyone aware of such software? > > > > publicfile. There is https://packages.debian.org/publicfile-installer . > > Except that publicfile isn't an example "only distributed as source > code". Debian doesn't distribute even that much - instead the > installer package *fetches* that code from upstream.
Exactly. The pine case was really unique, because we distributed the source as a Debian source package, i.e. orig.tar.gz + diff.gz + dsc. There was no .deb, and there was no "installer". The idea was for interested people to "apt-get source pine" and build it in the same way they would build any other package (the whole issue was even a little bit "educational", so to speak). I think there has not been any package like that after pine was removed (but I'm not 100% sure). If that's the case, I recommend removing the paragraph entirely. Thanks.
