DT == Dylan Thurston [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dylan,
DT I originally raised this issue wrt the file
DT /usr/share/doc/texmf/metapost/base/mpman.ps.gz in the
DT tetex-doc package.
Yeah, I know. Believe me, I know.
[deletia]
DT AFAICT, this is the principal reference
On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, C.M. Connelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many packages contain preprints or reprints of academic papers as
part of their documentation. In many cases, there is no
``source'' available for these documents -- they are distributed
as PostScript or PDF files.
...
My feeling
On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 02:10:17PM -0800, C.M. Connelly wrote:
Exactly. So the question is, does the DFSG really apply to
documentation or not?
Of course it does. Read the Debian Social Contract.
1. Debian Will Remain 100% Free Software
We promise to keep the Debian GNU/Linux
On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 02:10:17PM -0800, C.M. Connelly wrote:
Exactly. So the question is, does the DFSG really apply to
documentation or not?
On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Branden Robinson wrote:
Of course it does. Read the Debian Social Contract.
The Debian Distribution is entirely, 100% Free
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What does the GPL definition have to do with Debian?
Perhaps you were unaware of it. Many Debian packages contain GPL'd
elements.
Thomas
On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 10:59:27PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
I submit since postscript is turing complete, postscript documents are
actually already in source form.
A Turing-complete system is one in which the behaviour of a universal
Turing machine can be completely emulated.
Er. That would
I am fully aware of the fact that Debian contains GPL'd stuff. But what
does a GPL definition of source have to do with a DFSG 2 determination?
On 17 Mar 2002, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What does the GPL definition have to do with Debian?
Perhaps
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am fully aware of the fact that Debian contains GPL'd stuff. But what
does a GPL definition of source have to do with a DFSG 2 determination?
The context was not asking that question.
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I submit since postscript is turing complete, postscript documents are
actually already in source form.
If the GPL is in question, it gives a specific definition of source
under which most postscript documents are not in source form.
Thomas
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 10:59:27PM -0700, John Galt wrote:
I submit since postscript is turing complete, postscript documents are
actually already in source form.
A Turing-complete system is one in which the behaviour of a universal
Turing machine can
On 17 Mar 2002, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I am fully aware of the fact that Debian contains GPL'd stuff. But what
does a GPL definition of source have to do with a DFSG 2 determination?
The context was not asking that question.
No, in context, the
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, provide a definition of source that includes interpretive languages
such as Perl. I submit that any definition of source so broad as to
include a perlscript must necessarily include a postscript document.
I think we can just use the same one as the
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 12:15:41AM -0700, John Galt wrote:
Okay, provide a definition of source that includes interpretive languages
such as Perl. I submit that any definition of source so broad as to
include a perlscript must necessarily include a postscript document.
The form of a
On 17 Mar 2002, Thomas Bushnell, BSG wrote:
John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Okay, provide a definition of source that includes interpretive languages
such as Perl. I submit that any definition of source so broad as to
include a perlscript must necessarily include a postscript document.
On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Glenn Maynard wrote:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 12:15:41AM -0700, John Galt wrote:
Okay, provide a definition of source that includes interpretive languages
such as Perl. I submit that any definition of source so broad as to
include a perlscript must necessarily include a
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 01:14:50AM -0700, John Galt wrote:
The form of a {program,document} that is intended for modification. This
includes perl scripts (unless they've been run through an obfuscator),
human-editable HTML, and human-editable PDF. It clearly doesn't include
most generated
On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 10:24:36AM +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
I would also guess that in most cases the availability of source is
irrelevant, because the academic paper isn't available under a
DFSG-free licence anyway; most authors of academic papers don't want
other people
John == John Galt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John On 17 Mar 2002, Sam Hartman wrote:
C == C M Connelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
C Many packages contain preprints or reprints of academic papers
C as part of their documentation. In many cases, there is no
C ``source''
C == C M Connelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
C Many packages contain preprints or reprints of academic papers
C as part of their documentation. In many cases, there is no
C ``source'' available for these documents -- they are
C distributed as PostScript or PDF files.
One case
Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
C Many packages contain preprints or reprints of academic papers
C as part of their documentation. In many cases, there is no
C ``source'' available for these documents -- they are
C distributed as PostScript or PDF files.
One case that seems
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
EG == Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
EGE I agree that the PS or PDF should count as source if the
EGE original source has been lost, but upstream not having the
EGE original source isn't quite strong enough. I would guess
On 17 Mar 2002, Sam Hartman wrote:
C == C M Connelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
C Many packages contain preprints or reprints of academic papers
C as part of their documentation. In many cases, there is no
C ``source'' available for these documents -- they are
C distributed as
On Sat, 16 Mar 2002, C.M. Connelly wrote:
Many packages contain preprints or reprints of academic papers as
part of their documentation. In many cases, there is no
``source'' available for these documents -- they are distributed
as PostScript or PDF files.
Postscript is source. One assumes,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Many packages contain preprints or reprints of academic papers as
part of their documentation. In many cases, there is no
``source'' available for these documents -- they are distributed
as PostScript or PDF files.
Examples of packages that include
24 matches
Mail list logo
