[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: sources and scripts for generated files
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: sources and scripts for generated files |
Date: |
Mon, 26 May 2014 23:06:24 +0900 |
Andreas Röhler writes:
> > But this part is not hard to understand.
> >
> > (1) You must provide sources that are reasonably convenient to edit.
> > (2) Which do you think is more editable? Ship it.
> Preferences might change and be close to tastes. Should really all
> the ephemeric helper-functions used in the edit-process need to be
> included?
Eh?
> Always understood GPL legal term "source" in sense of
> required-to-build-the-binary. I.e. in sense of "Corresponding
> Source", where it's said:
Before the definition of "Corresponding Source", the gods have chosen
to place the definition of "Source".[1] See line one of the section
you quoted. Application of that definition is what everybody else in
this thread is concerned with.
Footnotes:
[1] With apologies to Grandmaster Lasker, I believe it was, as well
as any atheists who may be listening in.
Re: sources and scripts for generated files, Paul Eggert, 2014/05/26
Re: sources and scripts for generated files, Stefan Monnier, 2014/05/26