Re: PHPNuke license
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 01:18:22PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > I've read it.
> > > In a nutshell, I don't know of any reasonable person that would define
> > > "object code" as the output of tr a-z A-Z on a text file.
> > Nice to meet you. :) That is, I'm perfectly willing to accept that as
> > an example of "object code" if the only alternative is to call it
> > "source code".
> As a result, the output of tr a-z A-Z may be either source code *or*
> object code, *depending on the intent of the party making this change*.
> else that the GPL doesn't permit distribution of. I'm happy to be
> generous and say that it's object code in this case.
I guess we have "source form", "object form" and "encoded or translated form".
The former is suitable for creation and editing, the second for direct use
in the intended function of the work, and the latter for neither -- rather
it is a form which may or may not be useful in any particular way (e.g.
reducing storage requirement), but it does retain the original meaning of
the source form.
Thinking about it a little further, I guess there are two subtypes of encoded
form; reversible and non-reversible.
Distribution of reversible encoded forms should be allowed (e.g. gzipped
tarballs), non-reversible probably not (e.g. obfuscation).
Nick Phillips -- firstname.lastname@example.org
You have been selected for a secret mission.