[ajross]

> release the source code of a project under a license that prohibits compilation of that source code

Such a license would qualify for neither "open source" nor "free software" under the relevant official definitions though.

Yes, it would be reviewable for bugs and probably preferrable to a blob. But without the ability to verify the complication you'd have no assurance that the proprietary code was actually built with the reviewed source. Basically this would just be a stunt.

[esrauch]

If the license said that you were in violation if you executed the built code but there was instructions to build the exact version that is distributed it would still allow people to verify that the binary was built from the provided source.

I recall Transgaming Wine had a model that was effectively this, it was difficult for a laymen to build the source and binaries couldn't be distributed freely but the source was still available.