Follow-up Comment #8, patch #7696 (project freeciv):

> Not going to happen,
This makes me feel really sad. Free software is based on collaboration, and
sharing the source is required to achieve that.

> I'll put gzipped C source to data/graphics if it makes u happy.
As that source code (1) can't be used to produce the binary rcc (at least
using standard Qt tools) and (2) doesn't provide easy access to the individual
icons, it won't make me "happier".

This is the argument I never thought I would ever need to use. The GPLv2
> The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making
modifications to it.
I think this implies the source code is the qrc file together with all the
files needed to build the rcc, and nothing else. Indeed, look at the
"standard" (=what's in the Qt doc) procedure to get a rcc file:
* Write a XML-based .qrc and put its dependencies at the right locations
* Invoke the Qt Resource Compiler, rcc
* You have a .rcc blob
Now compare this to the procedure for compiling C to object code, and you'll
see it's quite similar. There are powerful tools to modify assembly directly,
just like there is GammaRay. This makes me think of the qrc-based tree as the
"source code".

If my reasoning is right, distributing Freeciv with the rcc file only would be
a violation of the copyright of everyone who contributed to Freeciv before.
This would make it illegal to distribute Freeciv. I don't want this to

In summary, to your
> Not going to happen,
I oppose "You're legally bound by the license and have to do something like


Reply to this item at:


  Message posté via/par Gna!

Freeciv-dev mailing list

Reply via email to