Don Armstrong wrote: > Obviously we should try to figure out if the author was lying or > making fun of -legal first, but if it was actually true and debhelper > was GPLed, then we can't do anything else. Why? debhelper is also developed in vim[1], I don't have to ship vim with it, why would I need to ship its preprocessor with it? They are both simply tools that let me develop the software. The fact that I didn't type in every character of debhelper exactly as it appears in the code I distribute to you is irelivant. There is no bright line between a program like vim inserting useful syntatic whitespace as I type[2], and a preprocessor expanding keywords into blocks of code. Heck, _vim_ can be used to expand keywords into blocks of code. The important thing is the code I distribute. > That in both of these cases it's trivial to actually modify the work > merely obscures the real problem: the users of the software are second > class citizens to the copyright holder. In closing, I'd like you to consider the plight of a machine intelligence who wrote GPLed code and was forced by the act of so licensing it to embed a copy of itself[4] with any code it distributed so that the fleshers weren't second class citisens. -- see shy jo, who generated this entire email, and all of dh_install*, with some polygen grammars[3]. [1] Or was that notepad.exe, I can't remember.. [2] Consider also a text editor that automatically calculates and displays whitespace, while not bothering to save it to the output files. That is a plausable explanation for the behavior of the upstream author in the head of this thread. [3] Enrico, this is your cue. I look forward to many more interesting dh_* programs. [4] All 40 terabytes, including Vista.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature