On Sat, Jul 23, 2005 at 01:32:37AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Uncommented source is not the same as source with comments stripped to make > > it harder to understand. > > > > The former is merely potentially bad source code, but clearly source. The > > latter is obfuscation, and is not source at all. Assuming what Florian > > says is accurate, Java bytecode is not source any more than C code with > > comments stripped, which would imply that Debian should not be accepting > > it as source. > > So if I write C with comments and then remove them that's not DFSG free, > but if I fail to add them in the first place then it's fine for main?
Yes; as noble a goal as is writing good, well-commented code, that's not what the DFSG is about; it's about free software, including source code. If you write a well-commented program, and remove the comments in the copy you give me, you havn't given me the source at all. Why should Debian consider obfuscated code sufficient for DFSG#2? -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]