Is this a dsfg violation?

[Ian Jackson]

Joel Bryan Juliano writes ("Is this a dsfg violation?"):
> I grabbed a fresh firefox source from edgy, and a quick grep gives already
> patched files outside debian/ directory.
> 
> firefox-1.99+2.0rc2+dfsg$ grep -lR -i "ubuntu" *
> browser/app/firefox-branding.js

I agree with the other reasons people have for rejecting this
criticism, but there is another one too:

The modifications to all of those files are in the .diff.gz; the
.orig.tar.gz is precisely the upstream source tarball with the
`other-licenses' directory removed.

So even if the DFSG were directly relevant to Ubuntu, and the DFSG was
intended to be a set of rules for how to distribute things rather than
a set of criteria for freeness, and the DFSG required rather than
merely permitting separate patch distribution, there is no problem
because separate patch distribution is exactly what we're doing.

Ian.