[wp-hackers] Putting the P in WordPress

[Kris Young]

Drama makes the world go around, Gav.

Thoroughly enjoying the white-knight GNU Protection Squad on their
crusade against Mattzor the Mad, Wordpress Tyrant. Keep it up!

-----Original Message-----
From: wp-hackers-bounces at lists.automattic.com
[mailto:wp-hackers-bounces at lists.automattic.com] On Behalf Of Gavin
Pearce
Sent: 08 July 2010 09:26
To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] Putting the P in WordPress

I'd just like to say....

In spite of what everyone, including Matt, has said, I think this is the
best discussion we've had on here for ages.

Debates and points from both sides - with evidence and some big
conclusions.

Shame one side is wrong mind ... but still  ;)  (I jest).

G


-----Original Message-----
From: wp-hackers-bounces at lists.automattic.com
[mailto:wp-hackers-bounces at lists.automattic.com] On Behalf Of Peter
Westwood
Sent: 07 July 2010 18:27
To: wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
Subject: Re: [wp-hackers] Fwd: Re: Putting the P in WordPress


On 7 Jul 2010, at 16:05, Mark E wrote:

> The obfuscation of the easter egg blatantly violates GPL v2. So all
the
> stuff you say about GPL boils down to this: "Do as I as say, not as I
> do". And here I was thinking that you followed GPL to the letter, as
you imply other people should do.


In what way?

I believe the specific wording from the GPL2 you are interpreting 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. However, as a special
exception, the source code distributed need not include anything that is
normally distributed (in either source or binary form) with the major
components (compiler, kernel, and so on) of the operating system on
which the executable runs, unless that component itself accompanies the
executable. "

In my reading in no way does this preclude the distribution of
obfuscated code - what it is trying to prevent is the distribution of
compiled object files without the corresponding source code to allow
modifications to be made.

As JS and PHP are always distributed in source form as part of the
WordPress download I don't see how we are violating the licence.

Would you consider it a licence violation if we were to ship WordPress
without the include .dev.js files so as to decrease the download size
and make automatic upgrades use less memory?

Cheers
-- 
Peter Westwood
http://blog.ftwr.co.uk | http://westi.wordpress.com
C53C F8FC 8796 8508 88D6 C950 54F4 5DCD A834 01C5

_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers
_______________________________________________
wp-hackers mailing list
wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers