Re: Unidentified subject!

[Walter Landry <wlandry@ucsd.edu>]

Anthony DeRobertis <asd@suespammers.org> wrote:
> 
> On Thursday, Sep 18, 2003, at 11:24 US/Eastern, Brian T. Sniffen wrote:
> 
> > Also, the requirement to distribute a transparent form appears to
> > violate DFSG 2, since it does not permit "distribution in source code
> > as well as compiled form".
> 
> Brian, I'm not sure how that follows. Could you elaborate?
> 
> AFAICT, the requirement to distribute in transparent, e.g., source, 
> form is quite similar to the requirement from the GPL, version 2, which 
> we all consider free (per DFSG 10, if nothing else).

The definition of transparent is similar to, but not the same as
source.  For example, the "source" for a LyX document is not
"transparent".

Regards,
Walter Landry
wlandry@ucsd.edu