On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 09:02:08 +0200 Vincent Bernat wrote: > ❦ 15 octobre 2015 10:26 +1100, Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au> : [...] > > There are many cases that are clarified by that > > definition, to the point of clear resolution. > > The recent discussions on debian-devel@ shows that not everybody agree > with this definition. Notably, several persons think the source code for > one project should depend on the user, not on the developer. Maybe I am misunderstanding you here (I have not read the debian-devel discussions), but this sounds like a really harmful definition of source: let's suppose you write a program in C and release the C code under a DFSG-free license; after that, one user insists that he/she prefers COBOL over C, and thus he/she claims you have not distributed source code, unless you make COBOL code available! Your program is therefore non-free! -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/ There's not a second to spare! To the laboratory! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
Attachment:
pgp2SPngB4oGD.pgp
Description: PGP signature