On Thu, 2003-09-18 at 16:05, Walter Landry wrote: > The definition of transparent is similar to, but not the same as > source. For example, the "source" for a LyX document is not > "transparent". I understand that; in fact, I was one of the many people who pointed out that problem. But that's not what Brian said --- he said that there is a violation of DFSG 2 "since it does not permit 'distribution in source code as well as compiled form'." That's what I'd like a clarification of.
Description: This is a digitally signed message part