On 07/04/12 06:08, Daniel Green wrote:
At this point, the waf binary should be considered no different than a zip file containing source. It's just that this fact isn't obvious.
In GPL terms, cf. my earlier answer:
The “source code” for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. The fact that part of the Waf script is zipped up and therefore not immediately available to read might in principle be a violation here -- it's certainly a problem for Debian who view it as imposing an unreasonably hard burden on anyone wishing to tweak the build system e.g. to fix bugs. However, what really got the Debian guys going is that what's in the zipped file has been processed to remove comments, whitespace etc., so it doesn't actually correspond to the GPL definition of the "source code". Further, the code is a subset of what's provided in the Waf git repo.
