[Gllug] Hypothetical GPL question

[Nix]

On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Steve Goodwin stipulated:
> One step further...what if the intention was to write a program to help
> people touch type. The program is written in such a way (using variables
> like 'quickbrownfox' and 'lazydog', and functions 'jumpedover' :) that
> itself is a touch typing test. Therefore, no computer stored version
> _should_ be made available, making the GPL 'preferred method' being a piece
> of paper with the hand written program code. (or perhaps a GIF scan would be
> acceptable)

An interesting question. I doubt you could stop someone else
distributing it in saner media, but I doubt it's a violation --- as long
as you normally made modifications by typing up a new sheet of paper. ;)

>> Of course, you couldn't write a very big program this way
>> (understatement) and it wouldn't be very useful, really just an
>> intellectual oddity. But I still claim you could have a GPL program
>> where the binary *is* the source code.
>> 
> Is this a good point to mention my mandelbrot generator? The prefered method
> for editting is the source code formatted into a mandelbrot. Changing the
> code breaks the layout, meaning you have to re-fix the layout to achieve the
> programs intention - a mandelbrot that produces a mandelbrot.

I don't know how well the GPL applies to obfuscated source. ;)

(Impressive to see the US justice system coming up with a sane decision
yesterday.)

-- 
`You're the only person I know who can't tell the difference
 between a pair of trousers and a desk.' --- Kieran, to me

-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at linux.co.uk
http://list.ftech.net/mailman/listinfo/gllug