Hi, BandiPat schrieb:
You miss the whole point! Logically, there should be as much mention of source files as of anything else. Logically, according to the GPL, source files are equally if not more important than binaries.
Are you now going to set up rules how the sources availability must be presented? Why? Are the sources easier to find on www.mozilla.com or www.openoffice.org or www.ubuntu.com? No, the other way round: They are easier to find on opensuse.org than on any other comparable project's site. I am still unable to find ANY place on opensuse.org that links to binaries and not to sources, but I am able to find many such places on ubuntu.com. What you are asking for is a ridiculous over-interpretation of the GPL. Finding the binaries on opensuse.org, but not finding the sources is impossible, period.
Novell needs to realize they are dealing with open source software now.
*sigh* I don't know your imagination of Novell, but I do know that most Novell people involved with opensuse.org have @suse.de mail addresses and know exactly how to deal with open source software because they have been dealing with open source software for AGES.
Maybe they'll eventually get it right, maybe they won't, but one thing sure, they do need to fix some things.
There is nothing to be fixed about sources availability. No problem => Nothing to be fixed. It's really a non-issue. Non-issues like this one are the typical result of fake GPL violation claims like the recent one on Groklaw: They multiply themselves infinitely. Just stop it. Andreas Hanke