On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:00:19 +1100 Riley Baird wrote: [...] > We can declare that the source did exist, but it doesn't anymore.
I don't think so. > > People use open-source software for a variety of reasons. Some people > use it for security reasons. Auditing a program where all copies of the > C++ source no longer exist is exactly as difficult as auditing the > program where all copies of the C++ source are kept secret by the > maintainer. This may be true, but a program should *not* be declared non-free, just because it is insecure or difficult to audit. There are examples out there of DFSG-free programs which are not as well written as one would desire, but this does *not* mean those programs are non-free: of course, you may decide to avoid them like the plague, because you don't feel safe with them. That may be perfectly legitimate and reasonable, for some cases, but I would not call those programs non-free, just insecure and/or badly written... -- 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
pgp9YfGq2pbFf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
