Scripsit Lewis Jardine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> How about:
>
> If the author could change something but you can't, he probably hasn't
> given you the source?
That is a very good rule of thumb, and really should be everybody's
first test for deciding whether something is source or not.
However, it still isn't robust enough to withstand attacks from
determined literalists. For example, you'll want to exclude instances
where the reason I cannot change something that the author can is that
the author is smart enough to understand the program and I'm
not. Conversely, the rule does not cover cases where the author has
thrown out the real source with the deliberate intention of preventing
anybody from modifying the work easily.
--
Henning Makholm "Panic. Alarm. Incredulity.
*Thing* has not enough legs. Topple walk.
Fall over not. Why why why? What *is* it?"
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
