Re: sourceless PDF files, license and DFSG-freeness (was: Is tabular data in binary format acceptable for Debian ?)
2010-02-01 00:59:52 GMT
On So, 31 Jan 2010, Jan Hauke Rahm wrote: > > Hm, I am sure that in the past we excluded PDF documentation because > > there was no source for them. Why did we do that? > > > > - Because the PDF was under GPL or GFDL, licenses which explicitly > > requires source distribution? Then it fits into what Steve thinks. > > > > - Because the PDF was under LPPL? I'm not sure whether the LPPL requires > > source - it doesn't do so explicitly, but it always assumes a > > difference between compiled and not-compiled work, and assumes the > > existenc of the not-compiled work. > > > > In this case, it might be that we were just fooled by some license > > zealots and could just have kept the files. The same is true if the > > PDF has some other license that doesn't require source. > > I don't know either... maybe it's DFSG? > > 2 Source Code > > The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in > source code as well as compiled form. > > Don't know if program was interpreted as "everything the damn binary > ships" :) Yes, that was the stance in many cases. I had discussions on that matter, and people said that if one cannot recreate the pdf with free tools we cannot include them.(Continue reading)



RSS Feed