On Sun, 2006-03-12 at 14:35 +0800, John Summerfied wrote: > While reading the source is, in principle, possible, it doesn't > constitute suitable documentation. Suitable for what? AFAICS, there's no requirement that we explain how to use "all the source code for all modules it contains, plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable", merely that it is provided. What language makes you think otherwise? > One should not need to be a capable python programmer in order to use > Anaconda to build modified versions of Fedora Core. I think that's a pretty reasonable bar, actually. The GPL isn't intended to force the licensor to train potential users on how to build things, it's intended to give the licensee the freedom to learn and benefit on equal level with the licensor. Beside that, such a requirement would be nonsensical. There's no requirement that I, as a licensor, even know how to build the software myself. I could quite legally be distributing binaries compiled by somebody else, along with source code I recieved, in full compliance with the GPL, from them, just so long as I'm still distributing the GPL's definition of "complete source code", which does not include any language about documentation regarding usage of build scripts. -- Peter
