Re: Defining 'preferred form for making modifications'
"Brian T. Sniffen" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> It certainly does: if there is no persistent form, it isn't the source.
But an xcf is not some weird thing which is not normally persistent.
It is easily and trivially persistent.
> Otherwise, the elisp code which is generated (and used, but usually never
> seen) by programmers writing C in Emacs would have to be distributed as
> part of the "build scripts" -- I don't have to distribute C-mode, the
> current region stack, or ephemeral keyboard macros with my C programs,
> right? I'm not entirely convinced it *always* applies, but in general it
> seems that persistent storage is a good rule of thumb for identifying
> source. If I didn't save it to work on later, it isn't source, but a
> single act of creation.
The more worrisome case, alas, is the person who *does* keep the .xcf,
but won't distribute it.
Or, for example, doesn't distribute whatever source is behind the
audio patches distributed. And so forth.