Is this a dsfg violation?

Ian Jackson ian at
Mon Oct 23 15:41:43 BST 2006

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.


More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list