On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 19:51:29 +0200, Thomas Bushnell, BSG <
address@hidden> wrote:
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 9:19 AM, Magnus Achim Deininger <
address@hidden> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Aug 2010 17:19:42 +0200, John Cowan <address@hidden> wrote:
Interesting point... but again, it's hard to draw a line when obfuscated
code turns obfuscated enough to not count as "source" anymore. A similar
problem arises when your proprietary programme is actually written in
assembly and you're using a GPL'd library. You might keep your documentation
and comments in separate files from the actual assembly code (maybe even for
a valid reason instead of a constructed one, like you'd like keep it all
documented in LaTeX or something). I'm not sure if the GPL requires you to
release internal documentation, but IIRC it does not, so then even if you do
release the source and thus comply with the GPL, it's virtually identical to
a disassembly of the generated object file, which would violate the GPL's
requirements (as
merely releasing object files to link against only works with the LGPL).
Sorry, but this is FUD. It's very easy to draw that line. "Source" is
the *preferred
form for making modifications. *It's whatever the actual developer edits,
and not some massaged, altered, adapted thing, no matter how obfuscated or
not.
Thomas