|
|
Posted by J B on 09/19/05 06:42
On 9/18/05, Rory Browne <rory.browne@gmail.com> wrote:
> Personally I would be more interested in hearing how you can justify
> obfuscating code before delivering it to a client.
For the same reasons that most commercial software houses that
distribute compiled software in binary form don't include the source
code, I would imagine.
Open source is a wonderful thing, but not every software developer
chooses to license their work that way. For those that don't, finding
a way to obfuscate code that's written in an interpreted language (and
therefore, traditionally appears in source form even when deployed) is
a compelling business objective.
I'm kinda playing the devil's advocate here, since every line of
code I've ever released has been either GPL- or LGPL-licensed...but
that's what my response would be if I were to release something to
which I didn't wish to give the licensees source access.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|