🚀 go-pugleaf

[Author shows assembly code distributions or hacked up C in place of original
source code that was written.]

> While I hope that no one will use that kind of unfriendly distribution of
> source code what in the GPL can prevent it?

Why can't people who know what document they are talking about read the
thing?

From the GPL:
Source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making
modifications to it.

Of course nothing actually prevents people from violating a license agreement
aside from possible sanctions, but it is clear that such acts would be a gross
violation that likely would not be hard to prove in any legal situation,
even in front of 'the common man'.  Any number of expert programmers could be
brought to testify on what this form is.

Can we all please get lives and stop fretting over issues as significant as
angels dancing on a pinhead?  (Of course, some pinheads become much more
manageable after such a romp.)

Seriously though, if you want to bring up a gnu-relevant issue on this group,
consider sitting back for a while and developing a significant line of
reasoning (standard net etiquette).  This implies that you examine available
documents pertaining to your issue, that you consider responses and that you
contemplate things for more than a day before you share your thoughts.  (I'm
talking about new issues, not ongoing ones here.)  Newsgroups (or mail lists)
are not media in which to brainstorm, due to the distribution delays, so there
is no reason, other than impatience, to jump right in before allowing an
argument or query to fully form.

Good luck to everyone in finding a worthwhile focus.

Bob
--
Bob Weiner				   rsw@cs.brown.edu
"You mean you wouldn't even read some mail messages?  Precisely."