NON-SOURCE POSTINGS CONSIDERED HARMFUL!

[Heiko Blume]

tchrist at convex.COM (Tom Christiansen) writes:

>Oh well.  I thought that it needed being said, and in public so that folks
>who didn't know better and might sometime go off and post non-source would
>learn that this wasn't the best idea.

sigh, what is "source code" ?! i got a somewhat flamy mail
in reply to my bash patches indicating that i should only
post source to alt.sources, and that a.s.d is for comments
and requests... i suspect that it's a prepared file that
the person (didn't bother to save the mail) sends to anyone
who, in his opinion, hasn't posted "source".

so let's discuss: are patches to a generally available program "source code" ?

if not, where the f*ck shall one post patches? alt.test? junk?

of course, since this is *alt*.sources i couldn't feel less
'guilty' of posting "non-source" to alt.sources.
-- 
      Heiko Blume <-+-> src at scuzzy.in-berlin.de <-+-> (+49 30) 691 88 93
                    public source archive [HST V.42bis]:
        scuzzy Any ACU,f 38400 6919520 gin:--gin: nuucp sword: nuucp
                     uucp scuzzy!/src/README /your/home