| |||||||||||||
Preferred form for whom?Preferred form for whom?Posted Mar 9, 2011 19:05 UTC (Wed) by pebolle (guest, #35204)In reply to: Preferred form for whom? by dwmw2 Parent article: Red Hat and the GPL
> If we accept your premise that we should concentrate on users rather than developers, then the answer is simple. The preferred form of source is no source at all; it just confuses them.
No, the answer is almost any reasonable form that allows the user to (at first) "study", (later) "change", and (perhaps, eventually) "improve" the software. (These terms are from the quote I used in my previous post.) The fact that source code will likely just confuse most people using computers (at first, I'd say) is no reason to concentrate on (in this case) kernel developers when interpreting "preferred form".
(Log in to post comments)
Preferred form for whom? Posted Mar 9, 2011 20:08 UTC (Wed) by dwmw2 (subscriber, #2063) [Link] It's not just kernel developers. Absolutely anyone with any experience of open source software development will know that dealing with a modified version of an upstream project is painful if you just have a tarball. You absolutely need to see the changes.
|
|||||||||||||