In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Terry Reedy wrote: > greg wrote: > >> Steven D'Aprano wrote: >> >>> We agree that the restriction is artificial, and I think irrational >> >> I think it's irrational for another reason, too -- it's >> actually vacuous. There's nothing to prevent you creating >> a set of patches that simply say "Delete all of the original >> source and replace it with the following". >> >> Then you're effectively distributing the modified source in >> its entirety, just with a funny header at the top of each >> source file that serves no useful purpose. > > The useful purpose is to show that you are distributing your work under > someone else's product name, instead of making up your own as you ought > to.
Except that the approach Terry Reedy gets around that without violating the licence. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
