can you take your source code, strip all the comments out and obfuscate it, and then still release it under the GPL v2?
Handling of CPU bugs disclosure 'incredibly bad': OpenBSD's de Raadt
Leo Ortiz
Caleb Richardson
OpenBSD/armv7 seems mostly unaffected by either bug. I know what architecture I'm buying next, and it's not Intel.
marc.info
Adam Ross
POWER for me
Jacob Harris
No if they were putting their users first they would change their license under the GPLv3.
But of course I bet that the bsd team just considers users the companies and developers who contributes and not the whole people who use their software.
Brandon Bailey
No. That is not considered source code.
Jackson Parker
how can the kernel get away with it then? i guess it's because it's the kernel and linus can do what ever the fuck he wants with zero repercussions, while anyone else who did for lesser software would have their packages taken out of the repo's.
Noah Thomas
hmmm
Landon Miller
Wrong. OpenBSD users don't give a shit about GPL or Stallman's ideals. OpenBSD team has delivered a relatively sane, secure, open-source OS for some decades, and that's all we care about. If someone forks OpenBSD and closes their branch, we don't give a shit, because the OpenBSD developers are always going to be much better than any lame asses corporates like Intel, Google, Redhat, and so on. That closed branch will end up rotting away, as it deviates more and more from OpenBSD's current state. That's why the corporates use Linux instead, because they can shove their requirements like systemd into users' asses, with very little pushback.
Noah Rivera
It is source code, comments are irrelevant.
Dylan Bell
obfuscation or intentionally difficult to read code + lack of comments = not source code
i'm not arguing lack of comments is the deciding factor.