On Wed, 29 Oct 2008, Brian May wrote: > Is there any requirement that says the source code must be editable > in a sane manner (e.g. editing a PDF file with a binary hex editor > would not be sane) with entirely DFSG compliant tools?
Source code is the (digitally-distributable) form of a work that is (closest to) the prefered form of modification.[0] That is to say, the form of the work that the upstream author would actually use to modify the work. If the upstream author modifies the work using a binary hex editor, then that's what the source is.[1] There may be open questions about whether we need to provide source for everything,[2] and whether source includes the tools necessary to build and/or modify,[3] but those are separate questions, none of which are particularly on topic on this mailing list. [-project is the appropriate place to discuss that.] Don Armstrong 0: The parentheticals deal with cases where the prefered form of modification has been lost or the prefered form of modification is some kind of physical object that can't be distributed. 1: I'd argue against distributing something because it would be impossible to maintain, and the upstream author is likely to be insane, but that's nothing to do with the DFSG. 2: Like firmware or documentation 3: Compilers, editors, etc. -- To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism; to steal from many is research. -- Steven Wright http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
