Re: scientific paper in package only in postscript form non-free?
* MJ Ray <firstname.lastname@example.org> [110314 16:09]:
> Paul Wise wrote:
> > [...] It is doubtful that the PostScript files are
> > the source code referred to by DFSG item 2. More likely is that the
> > source files are TeX documents.
> Cool, where is the agreed clearer version of DFSG 2 that says what it
> means by source code?
I think the consensus is that source is more or less what the GPL
explicitly defines source code to be: "The source code for a work means
the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it.".
If something is not suitable to realistically make any changes to it,
it definitely is not source in any meaning useful to interpret the DFSG.
And while postscript can be nice hand-written source, dvips
generated postscript code is usually the exact opposite and most of
the time even too opaque to even make trivial changes.
Bernhard R. Link