While my views on this are well known, I'll rehash them again just for my own vanity.
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Matthew Garrett wrote: > While the GPL defines source as the prefered form for modification, > that definition doesn't exist in the DFSG. There are a lot of things that the DFSG does not define, but we still deal with it as best we can. > There's no reason to believe that we need the preferred form for > modification, merely an acceptable form for modification. Otherwise > we run into all sorts of issues with JPEGs and suchlike... What sorts of issues with JPEGs? We should have available and distribute the prefered form for modification for them as well. That is, whatever form upstream actually uses when upstream wants to modify the JPEG. In some cases, this will just be a JPEG. In others, it will be an XCF, SVG or something else entirely. While there may be a better definition of source code than the "prefered form for modification," I haven't seen it yet. Don Armstrong -- Certainly the game is rigged. Don't let that stop you. If you don't bet, you can't win. -- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p240 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
