Re: Compiled files without sources????

[Tim Cross]

On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Thien-Thi Nguyen <address@hidden> wrote:
> () Chong Yidong <address@hidden>
> () Sat, 30 Jul 2011 16:33:16 -0400
>
>   Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
>
>   >     As a first pass, I have added a etc/grammars directory containing the
>   >     grammar files in trunk.  The instructions for compiling the grammars
>   >     is in etc/grammars/README.  Note that the resulting output differs
>   >     from the actual grammar data in lisp/cedet/semantic/[bovine|wisent],
>   >     because those were manually modified subsequently.
>   >
>   > This difference is a problem -- it is like distributing a patched
>   > binary.  It doesn't correspond to the source code, and doesn't comply
>   > with the GPL.
>
>   If developers are forbidden from manually altering the output of a
>   compiled grammar, that is a usage restriction.
>
> The problem is that the differences aren't accountable, not that there are
> differences.  To be accountable, the path from original to current must be
> transparent.  If that path involves manual editing, a commit (+ ChangeLog)
> should be generated.  If that path is machine manifested, the program that
> does the change must be distributed (+ commit + ChangeLog, of course).  In
> the case of distribution, GPL comes into play (recursively).
>
>

FYI, for anyone who perhaps may not recognize how important this is,
this issue has been reported in the latest issue of LWN.

Tim