On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:22:40AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> there is also the problem that a non-free source package is not allowed to
> produce binary packages for the main archive… Perhaps the best solution for
> the
> moment is to keep the glam2 source and binary packages and have the meme
> binary
> package ship the glam2 programs and conflict against the glam2 package ?
After I pressed the send key I just had a similar thought: We should
probably not drop some free code in favour of non-free code. I'm also
not convinced that the glam2 code inside meme is free any more (should
be double checked - otherwise we might be able to *extract* this code
from the source tarball of meme and split it into meme-free /
meme-nonfree parts.
In contrast to Charles suggestion I had the following package scheme in
mind:
glam2 binary builded from old glam2 source
glam2-nf (glam2-nonfree, whatever name) builded as one binary package
out of others from meme source
Both binaries need to conflict each other.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
