Re: generated source files, GPL and DFSG

[Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org>]

* Florian Weimer (fw@deneb.enyo.de) [050722 23:56]:
> * Andreas Barth:
> 
> > Actually, the DFSG says:
> > | 2. Source Code
> > |
> > | The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in
> > | source code as well as compiled form.
> >
> > Obviously e.g. fonts are no programms, even if they are in main.
> 
> It's clear from the context (and previous discussion) that this has to
> be interpreted as "software".

I disagree with that. As there were "editorial changes" that had as
declared goal to replace any such places with the "real meaning", and
this was not touched, it has to be obviously interpreted as program.

And even if it has to be interpreted that way, the social contract
speaks of works, which is more than only software (i.e. there are
non-software works in Debian).

So, whichever interpretation you prefer, you end up that some works
don't need to be available in source.


Cheers,
Andi