Bug#654474: Doesn't contain source for waf binary code

[Michael Biebl]

Hi,

as this issue affects quite a few packages, I'd like to bring this up
for wider discussion.

The issue basically is, that the waf build system uses a python script,
which embeds a bz2 tarball containing further python sources. Those are
unpacked to .waf-*/ when the waf script is executed. More details can be
found at [1].

A few observations/questions:

* We do accept tarball-in-tarball packages. What makes this specific
case different?

* Where exactly is the DFSG violation? The package does ship the source
code even if embedding it in the waf script doesn't make that obvious

but

* Would it be sufficient to document in README.source how a user can
unpack and modify the waf sources (basically what [2] does) and wouldn't
this fulfill the DFSG requirements?


* What about packages which ship both an autotools and waf based build
system and the Debian package uses the one based on autotools?



Michael


[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=645190
[2] http://wiki.debian.org/UnpackWaf


-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 900 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-gnome-maintainers/attachments/20120203/9224918b/attachment.pgp>