On 09/04/12 16:24, Kagamin wrote:
GPL doesn't prohibit distribution in binary form, it's about rights, not form.
The point is that there may be no meaningful "corresponding source" to the
zipped-up code. Cf. my other emails in the thread and the Debian discussions
linked to.
On 09-04-2012 16:24, Kagamin wrote:
On Friday, 6 April 2012 at 13:00:34 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
Yes, but -- if I understand correctly -- the Waf binary is provided as
an integral part of the source distribution. It's not just another
program that sits elsewhere on your computer and c
On Friday, 6 April 2012 at 13:00:34 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
wrote:
Yes, but -- if I understand correctly -- the Waf binary is
provided as an integral part of the source distribution. It's
not just another program that sits elsewhere on your computer
and can be installed independently.
I
