[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Let's stop feeding the NVidia cuckoo

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:16:46 +0000 Matthew Garrett wrote:

> If we actually upheld this standard at present, it would result in us
> removing a large number of packages from Debian.

I think that these issues are sarge-ignore because of GR2004-004, but
will be release-critical bugs post-Sarge.

> However, even
> ignoring that, I think your definition leads to some strangeness. It
> suggests that a JPEG is DFSG-free in and of itself in some cases, but
> that the existence of a lossless representation of that picture
> renders the JPEG non-free unless it's distributed with that lossless
> representation. If I delete the only copy of the lossless picture, is
> the JPEG now source?
> If a JPEG can be considered "free enough" under some circumstances,
> I'm confused as to why it's not always good enough.

OK, think of a program.
I give you a file written in C, that can be compiled by gcc into the
binary executable.

Am I giving you the source code?
Yes, in most cases, I am.

But what if the program is a parser generated by Bison?
Now the C code is not source code anymore.
The grammar description is the real source code.

If C code can be considered "free enough" under some circumstances, why
is it not always good enough?
Because it's not always the "preferred form for modification", that's

          Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday.
  Francesco Poli                             GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4
 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpbOORfJtpzJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: