Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 08:25:44PM -0400, Nathanael Nerode wrote: > > We should allow it if source code once existed but no longer exists (all > > the copies of the source code were wiped accidentally at some time in > > the past). > > So it's okay to ignore the DFSG in this case?
The definition of source code in the GPL is "the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it", and this definition is generally accepted by Debian developers. For many ROMs and older computer programs, people can and do frequently make changes by editing the binary. There are probably more people who can change a Nintendo ROM by binary hacking then who could change GNAT by editing source code. If this is all we have, and people are working at this level, I see no reason to exclude it. > Why can't we do that for, say, GFDL manuals? If we were talking in a resturant, I might throw my drink at you. Those threads are a cesspool that are basically devoid of new argument; there's no need to drag this thread in there. If you want to continue an eternal flamewar, then go ahead, but at least let other discussions go in in debian-legal. -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup CareerBuilder.com has over 400,000 jobs. Be smarter about your job search http://corp.mail.com/careers