Posted Mar 5, 2011 15:46 UTC (Sat) by corbet
In reply to: Commitment to Open (Red Hat News)
Parent article: Commitment to Open (Red Hat News)
I always interpreted "preferred form" to be the original source, rather than, say, object files or preprocessor output. The actual text is:
The source code for a work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications to it. For an executable work, complete source code means 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.
The idea being that you can modify and rebuild the program. As nice as it might be, I think stretching "preferred form" to "the form that would be most convenient for you" goes beyond what the license is trying to say.
One could say that Red Hat's distribution violates this little provision:
You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
That requirement has been mostly ignored for many years, though, and I'm not sure anybody really wants to bring it back now.
to post comments)