[theme-reviewers] Minified CSS

[Austin Matzko]

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
> Come now, let us be reasonable.
> The GPL requirement to provide code in the "preferred form of work for
> making modifications" regards file formats, not the quality of the written
> code. "Human readable" != "human parsable". The former is a function of the
> data format; the latter is a function of the developer's coding ability and
> adherence to standards. The GPL is concerned with the former, not the
> latter.

Your interpretation does not match up with that of the Free Software
Foundation, the authors of the GPL (and "principal organizational
sponsor of the GNU Operating System"), who write, "Therefore,
accessibility of source code is a necessary condition for free
software. Obfuscated “source code” is not real source code and does
not count as source code."

<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html>

> Both the "minified" (style.css) and "WP CSS Coding Standards compliant"
> (style.full.css) versions of the file are type text/CSS; thus, both are
> *exactly the same format*. The "preferred form of work for making
> modifications" to CSS files is text/css. Thus, as far as the GPL is
> concerned, both meet this criterion.

Obfuscated code doesn't count as source, no matter the file type.
That's why, for example, you can't claim obfuscated PHP or JavaScript
files as source, even in a PHP text file (as opposed to an
executable).

For further reference, here's another prominent GPL project that
spells out exactly what CSS source means:
<http://drupal.org/licensing/faq/>

"The GPL requires that I distribute the "source code" of my files.
What does that mean for a web application?
...
"For CSS code, the CSS file itself, without any compression or
obfuscation, is its own source code."