Re: GPLed software with no true source. Was: Bug#402650: ITP: mozilla-foxyproxy
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Nick Phillips wrote:
> On 31/01/2007, at 9:48 AM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> >The upstream maintainer. Whatever form(s) of the work the upstream
> >maintainer actually uses to modify the work is the prefered form
> >for modification.
> Perhaps you could add a "wheeeeeee" every time you mention this here
> -- it would help to convey the huge leap you're making there.
It's not all that large of a leap. The recipient of a work clearly
can't be determining the prefered form for modification, because what
is prefered for upstream may not be prefered for them.
Who are we left with then? The people upstream who actually are doing
the modifications to the work using the prefered form(s) for
A GPLs library
B GPLs machine code.
C links B to A.
A complains to C.]
> Do you think that this is acceptable?
Is everyone distributing the form that the upstream for that work
would actually use to modify the code? [That is, is C distributing the
form that A would use to modify work A, and B would use to modify work
B, and whatever form C used to modify the work that he modified?]
If the answer is yes, then yes. If no, then no.
[If the argument is that figuring out whether or not the people is
lying is difficult and requires judgement, then I agree. I've been
trying to ignore that facet completely because it's not particularly
interesting to me. Please play along and ignore it too! ;-)]
He was wrong. Nature abhors dimensional abnormalities, and seals them
neatly away so that they don't upset people. Nature, in fact, abhors a
lot of things, including vacuums, ships called the Marie Celeste, and
the chuck keys for electric drills.
-- Terry Pratchet _Pyramids_ p166