Matthew Garrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MJ Ray wrote: > > [...] *You* specialised the subthread, so you shouldn't > > start playing people offside by regeneralising it. > > Jeremy said "We're not worried about how modifiable the end result is. > We're worried about how the author would prefer to make modifications", > which was entirely the point I answered. I think the modifiability of a > work is the defining characteristic of its freeness (or otherwise), and > as a result the mechanism used to generate that work is unimportant. > That applies to JPEGs as much as it applies to any other form of work. I > haven't had an explanation for why the author should have any special > say in the matter.
As you may remember, the context was whether something is the source code. When considering whether it is source, is it more important what a debian user can reasonably modify, or should more weight be given to what has already been used to modify it? The odds are that we always have something that it is possible to modify *somehow* by necessity of packaging, so why do you think we need to worry about that and ignore upstream? [...] > > Again, I am seriously worried that I agree with Andrew Suffield. :-/ > Why does this worry you? Why do you ask why that worries me? -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only: see http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Subscribed to this list. No need to Cc, thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
