On 01/30/07 11:54, Don Armstrong wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Stephen Gran wrote:Just pointing out that it doesn't break our ability to redistribute under the GPL.This refrain keeps getting repeated, but still no one has explained how distributing a form of the work which is _not_ the prefered form for modification satisfies section 3 of the GPL:
It can't be explained because your assumptions are wrong.You think that section 3 needs to be satisfied based on your interpretation but it only needs to be satisfactory to the author.
The GPL is not a contract. Rights are granted by the creator.