Build Tools for Source

[kemitchell]

Can we safely add a provision requiring that the source code, scripts, and build configurations provided to the customer will work with widely available commercial and open source build tools, like compilers?

In most cases, I imagine open source build chains will do the job. But I can think of a number of situations, such as with embedded situations, where the reasonable commercial expectation is that anyone compiling for some architecture has a license for a commercial compiler for that architecture.

[heathermeeker]

As a warranty? Wouldn't that be in the specs for the software?

[kemitchell]

We could structure as a warranty or as part of the obligation to provide source.

I often see build instructions in documentation, but not always. I take it we do want to support deals where the vendor is providing source to a customer, even though they don't publish it.

Come to think of it, we might add an optional section requiring the customer to keep source in confidence.