Re: Free non-software stuff and what does it mean. [was Re: General Resolution: Force AMD64 into Sarge]
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004, Joe Wreschnig wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-07-23 at 23:41, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > the the format that upstream actually uses for modification or
> > creation of the work should be supplied.
>
> I'm perfectly happy providing the preferred form of modification for
> my works -- but that is not always the same as the preferred form of
> *creation* of my work.
Creation was included because some works are created without a thought
to being able to modify them at all, in much the same way that a
binary could be created from source which was then thrown away.
While it would be nice[1] to see the form upstream uses for creation
as well as the form used for modification, the form for modification
is sufficient. Only in cases where it doesn't exist do we need to have
the form used for creation. [In this case, you might just consider my
"form used for creation" the "prefered form for modification"...]
> I do agree that having the preferred form of modification -- the
> form the author uses for modification -- is absolutely essential.
On that I think we agree completely.
Don Armstrong
1: It would also be nice to have a whole lot of money, and a big fine
car... everything that a man could want; yes more, that's what I'd ask
for.
--
The game of science is, in principle, without end. He who decides one
day that scientific statements do not call for any further test, and
that they can be regarded as finally verified, retires from the game.
-- Sir Karl Popper _The Logic of Scientific Discovery_ §11
http://www.donarmstrong.com
http://rzlab.ucr.edu
Reply to: