rejecting wine1.3-gecko

[Scott Ritchie]

On 03/24/2011 08:12 AM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 02:28:30AM -0700, Scott Ritchie wrote:
>> On 03/24/2011 02:13 AM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 07:09:25PM -0700, Scott Ritchie wrote:
>>>> On 03/22/2011 07:44 AM, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
>>>>> I'm rejecting wine1.3-gecko, it contains a binary without source but its licence requires that we distribute the source.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>
>>>> Is this true?  It's MPL-licensed, which I thought allows us to link to
>>>> the source rather than ship it directly.
>>>
>>> It does but I don't see a link in this package and Ubuntu would have
>>> to be certain the source code would remain there for 12 months after
>>> the end of life of the distro version.
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>
>> Hmm seems you're right.  I'll add the link to the sourceforge page.
>>
>> We may have no choice other than the link, really, because this version
>> of wine-gecko can't be built entirely on Ubuntu (requires a Windows
>> step).  That pushes it into multiverse.
> 
> Opinion amongst archive admins is that a link to sourceforge wouldn't
> be sensible, we can't rely on a third party hosting the source for as
> long as we need it.  The source should be included in the source
> package, even if it isn't used directly to build the binary.
> 
> Jonathan

I've fixed this in my latest upload.

I've also fixed it in the wine1.2-gecko package, which is already in the
archive ;)

Thanks,
Scott Ritchie