Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Pasi Kärkkäinen
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 06:44:34PM +0300, Deyan Stoykov wrote:
 Timo Schoeler wrote:
  
  There's progress...
  
  http://press.redhat.com/2010/10/18/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-release-candidate-available-to-partners/
  
  Cheers,
  
  Timo
 
 Available to partners? Aren't RH obliged to release the source as usual?
 

Yes, to partners :)

-- Pasi

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Benjamin Franz
  On 10/19/2010 12:47 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
 On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 06:44:34PM +0300, Deyan Stoykov wrote:

 Available to partners? Aren't RH obliged to release the source as usual?

 Yes, to partners :)

I'm pretty sure Deyan is referring to their GPL obligations to make the 
source code available for most of it.

Given their heavy historical commitment to GPL, I have no doubt it will 
show up very shortly. They have always done a good job there.

-- 
Benjamin Franz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Nicolas Thierry-Mieg
Benjamin Franz wrote:
On 10/19/2010 12:47 AM, Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
 On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 06:44:34PM +0300, Deyan Stoykov wrote:

 Available to partners? Aren't RH obliged to release the source as usual?

 Yes, to partners :)

 I'm pretty sure Deyan is referring to their GPL obligations to make the
 source code available for most of it.

GPL doesn't say you have to distribute source code to the whole world, 
only to people you distribute the binaries to (ie the partners here).
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Karanbir Singh
hi Guys,

On 10/19/2010 12:00 PM, Benjamin Franz wrote:
 I'm pretty sure Deyan is referring to their GPL obligations to make the
 source code available for most of it.

.. this has nothing to do with it...

 Given their heavy historical commitment to GPL, I have no doubt it will
 show up very shortly. They have always done a good job there.

Sit back and think for a minute - they have given their partners( and 
only some of them ) access to a Release Candidate - its not RHEL6 that 
has been released.

There will almost certainly be no source showing up anywhere for this 
RC, if it does - I, for one,  would be very surprised.

- KB
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Jerry Franz

 On 10/19/2010 04:10 AM, Nicolas Thierry-Mieg wrote:

Benjamin Franz wrote:



Yes, to partners :)

I'm pretty sure Deyan is referring to their GPL obligations to make the
source code available for most of it.

GPL doesn't say you have to distribute source code to the whole world,
only to people you distribute the binaries to (ie the partners here).


Clauses 2b and 3b of GPLv2 would appear to say otherwise.*

2b)* You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in 
whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part 
thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties 
under the terms of this License.


*3b)* Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, 
to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of 
physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable 
copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms 
of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software 
interchange;


any third party and all third parties not the third party. It is a 
subtle but important distinction. It means you can't be *selective* 
about who gets it as I read it. Everyone or no one are your options.


--
Benjamin Franz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Jerry Franz
  On 10/19/2010 04:16 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
 hi Guys,

 On 10/19/2010 12:00 PM, Benjamin Franz wrote:
 I'm pretty sure Deyan is referring to their GPL obligations to make the
 source code available for most of it.
 .. this has nothing to do with it...


Yes, it does.

http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/compliance-guide.html

Second, note that the last line makes the offer valid to anyone who 
requests the source. This is because v2 § 3(b) requires that offers be 
“to give any third party” a copy of the Corresponding Source. GPLv3 has 
a similar requirement, stating that an offer must be valid for “anyone 
who possesses the object code”. These requirements indicated in v2 § 
3(c) and v3 § 6(c) are so that non-commercial redistributors may pass 
these offers along with their distributions. Therefore, the offers must 
be valid not only to your customers, but also to anyone who received a 
copy of the binaries from them. Many distributors overlook this 
requirement and assume that they are only required to fulfill a request 
from their direct customers. 

Once you publish/distribute GPL licensed code to *anyone*, your 
obligation to provide source kicks in for *everyone*. In practice, few 
people hammer at a company in process over it. But you *can*.

-- 
Benjamin Franz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Karanbir Singh
On 10/19/2010 12:52 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
 Once you publish/distribute GPL licensed code to *anyone*, your
 obligation to provide source kicks in for *everyone*. In practice, few
 people hammer at a company in process over it. But you *can*.

I am not a lawyer, but you blurb seems to indicate that the issue is 
applicable to people with the object code, which would make my last 
point valid.

Also, there are legalise around exactly what is considered a product / 
code snippet / build script and distribution - which is what makes 
things like NDA's workable.

- KB
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Jerry Franz

 On 10/19/2010 05:03 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:

On 10/19/2010 12:52 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:

Once you publish/distribute GPL licensed code to *anyone*, your
obligation to provide source kicks in for *everyone*. In practice, few
people hammer at a company in process over it. But you *can*.

I am not a lawyer, but you blurb seems to indicate that the issue is
applicable to people with the object code, which would make my last
point valid.



Only on v3 license code. Most code is still under v2.


Also, there are legalise around exactly what is considered a product /
code snippet / build script and distribution - which is what makes
things like NDA's workable.


Actually, the GPL  forbids using 'add on' agreements like NDAs that 
attempt to make it so an end user can't recompile or redistribute the 
code. The authors thought of those attempts to 'end run' the GPL's 
obligations when they wrote it. That is why clause 4 of the v2 license 
(or clauses 8 and 10 of the v3 license) exists.


*v2: 4.* You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program 
except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise 
to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will 
automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties 
who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will 
not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in 
full compliance.


NDAs that attempt to impose *restrictions* on the GPL while still 
publishing/distributing to a third party can't overcome the basic legal 
obligations of the GPL and this is *by design*. And yes, code snippets 
and build scripts are covered, too. See clause 3 of the v2 license.


Being as deeply involved in a FOSS exercise like CentOS as you are, you 
really should take the time to fully understand the license that enables 
it to happen at all.


--
Benjamin Franz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Les Mikesell
On 10/19/10 6:52 AM, Jerry Franz wrote:
On 10/19/2010 04:16 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
 hi Guys,

 On 10/19/2010 12:00 PM, Benjamin Franz wrote:
 I'm pretty sure Deyan is referring to their GPL obligations to make the
 source code available for most of it.
 .. this has nothing to do with it...


 Yes, it does.

 http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2008/compliance-guide.html

 Second, note that the last line makes the offer valid to anyone who
 requests the source. This is because v2 § 3(b) requires that offers be
 “to give any third party” a copy of the Corresponding Source. GPLv3 has
 a similar requirement, stating that an offer must be valid for “anyone
 who possesses the object code”. These requirements indicated in v2 §
 3(c) and v3 § 6(c) are so that non-commercial redistributors may pass
 these offers along with their distributions. Therefore, the offers must
 be valid not only to your customers, but also to anyone who received a
 copy of the binaries from them. Many distributors overlook this
 requirement and assume that they are only required to fulfill a request
 from their direct customers. 

 Once you publish/distribute GPL licensed code to *anyone*, your
 obligation to provide source kicks in for *everyone*. In practice, few
 people hammer at a company in process over it. But you *can*.

I'm fairly sure the FSF has never taken the approach of forcing anyone to 
distribute source to anyone who did not have binaries and thus the offer to 
receive source.  In theory you can't restrict the people who receive either 
binaries or source from redistributing them, but with RedHat you lose your 
service subscription if you do, and since non GPL'd parts are included, you'd 
have to separate them (kind of the point of using CentOS...).

-- 
   Les Mikesell
 lesmikes...@gmail.com

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Karanbir Singh
On 10/19/2010 01:31 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
 I am not a lawyer, but you blurb seems to indicate that the issue is
 applicable to people with the object code, which would make my last
 point valid.


 Only on v3 license code. Most code is still under v2.

and what license is the distro shipped as ?


 Also, there are legalise around exactly what is considered a product /
 code snippet / build script and distribution - which is what makes
 things like NDA's workable.

 Actually, the GPL forbids using 'add on' agreements like NDAs that

And how does the GPL get involved in relationships and partnerships that 
exist between people ?

 Being as deeply involved in a FOSS exercise like CentOS as you are, you
 really should take the time to fully understand the license that enables
 it to happen at all.

I understand the basics, for everything else - there are lawyers.

- KB
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Les Mikesell
On 10/19/10 7:31 AM, Jerry Franz wrote:
 On 10/19/2010 05:03 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
 On 10/19/2010 12:52 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
 Once you publish/distribute GPL licensed code to *anyone*, your
 obligation to provide source kicks in for *everyone*. In practice, few
 people hammer at a company in process over it. But you *can*.
 I am not a lawyer, but you blurb seems to indicate that the issue is
 applicable to people with the object code, which would make my last
 point valid.


 Only on v3 license code. Most code is still under v2.

V3 just makes it explicit. v2 wasn't intended to force anyone to distribute 
source to anyone who didn't have binaries, and if it did, it certainly couldn't 
dictate terms (i.e. you could charge any price you wanted for it).


 Also, there are legalise around exactly what is considered a product /
 code snippet / build script and distribution - which is what makes
 things like NDA's workable.

 Actually, the GPL forbids using 'add on' agreements like NDAs that attempt to
 make it so an end user can't recompile or redistribute the code. The authors
 thought of those attempts to 'end run' the GPL's obligations when they wrote 
 it.
 That is why clause 4 of the v2 license (or clauses 8 and 10 of the v3 license)
 exists.

 *v2: 4.* You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program 
 except
 as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, 
 modify,
 sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate
 your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or
 rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so
 long as such parties remain in full compliance.

 NDAs that attempt to impose *restrictions* on the GPL while still
 publishing/distributing to a third party can't overcome the basic legal
 obligations of the GPL and this is *by design*. And yes, code snippets and 
 build
 scripts are covered, too. See clause 3 of the v2 license.

 Being as deeply involved in a FOSS exercise like CentOS as you are, you really
 should take the time to fully understand the license that enables it to happen
 at all.

There are many different licenses covering code in Linux and *bsd 
distributions. 
  It doesn't make sense to consider one of them any more important than the 
others.  Especially the one that often prevents 'best of breed' combinations of 
components from being possible with its restrictions.

-- 
Les Mikesell
  lesmikes...@gmail.com
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Jerry Franz
  On 10/19/2010 05:37 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:

 Only on v3 license code. Most code is still under v2.
 and what license is the distro shipped as ?


That is a very good question. The *support and subscriptions* are under 
RH's own license. The *code* in the packages are under the licenses of 
the people who wrote it (generally not RH) and range over Apache, Perl, 
BSD, GPL, and a few other licenses. If RH wants to *only* publish the 
GPL (and similarly licensed) code, they could do that. But they would 
have to go package-by-package and separate them out. The kernel itself 
is GPL v2, btw.

 Also, there are legalise around exactly what is considered a product /
 code snippet / build script and distribution - which is what makes
 things like NDA's workable.
 Actually, the GPL forbids using 'add on' agreements like NDAs that
 And how does the GPL get involved in relationships and partnerships that
 exist between people ?


That is what it does. It *licenses* distribution between people. You 
can't say it's under GPL - but you can't redistribute it because I've 
made you sign an NDA. It violates the license that *you* accepted to 
use it yourself in the first place. RH can only use code written by 
other people *if they accept the license it is published under*. 
Otherwise *RH* itself does not have the right to use it at all.

-- 
Benjamin Franz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread mehdi
how open yum.conf in mode read write
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Jerry Franz
  On 10/19/2010 06:10 AM, mehdi wrote:
 how open yum.conf in mode read write

1. You need to do it as the 'root' user. Log in as 'root' and then you 
will be able to edit it.

2. Please don't hijack unrelated threads. To start a new topic, post a 
completely new message with a usefully relevant subject line.

-- 
Benjamin Franz
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Karanbir Singh
Hi,

On 10/19/2010 02:09 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
 That is what it does. It *licenses* distribution between people. You
 can't say it's under GPL - but you can't redistribute it because I've

Ok, so that is the point I am trying to make here.  RHEL6 isnt released 
as a product. They have an in-development code snapshot that they are 
offering to a bunch of people to come look at with them for comments, 
feedback, prep whathever.

Also worth keeping in mind is that the RC to partners does not prevent 
one of those partners from publishing the sources if they want for code 
where licensing and their agreement with Red Hat permits them to. I am 
not in a position to comment on that since I have neither seen the 
agreement that Red Hat have in place for these said partners, nor am I 
one of them.

Red Hat, once RHEL 6 actually ships, should make the code for the distro 
available on the ftp site, at which point we would need to consider the 
licensing and content payload for each package on its own merit.

- KB
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread JohnS

On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 14:21 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
 Hi,
 
 On 10/19/2010 02:09 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
  That is what it does. It *licenses* distribution between people. You
  can't say it's under GPL - but you can't redistribute it because I've
 
 Ok, so that is the point I am trying to make here.  RHEL6 isnt released 
 as a product. They have an in-development code snapshot that they are 
 offering to a bunch of people to come look at with them for comments, 
 feedback, prep whathever.
 
 Also worth keeping in mind is that the RC to partners does not prevent 
 one of those partners from publishing the sources if they want for code 
 where licensing and their agreement with Red Hat permits them to. I am 
 not in a position to comment on that since I have neither seen the 
 agreement that Red Hat have in place for these said partners, nor am I 
 one of them.

http://www.redhat.com/partners/


John

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread Karanbir Singh
On 10/19/2010 04:24 PM, JohnS wrote:
 Also worth keeping in mind is that the RC to partners does not prevent
 one of those partners from publishing the sources if they want for code
 where licensing and their agreement with Red Hat permits them to. I am
 not in a position to comment on that since I have neither seen the
 agreement that Red Hat have in place for these said partners, nor am I
 one of them.

 http://www.redhat.com/partners/


... ok, and ?

- KB
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread John Hinton
  On 10/19/2010 11:24 AM, JohnS wrote:
 On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 14:21 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
 Hi,

 On 10/19/2010 02:09 PM, Jerry Franz wrote:
 That is what it does. It *licenses* distribution between people. You
 can't say it's under GPL - but you can't redistribute it because I've
 Ok, so that is the point I am trying to make here.  RHEL6 isnt released
 as a product. They have an in-development code snapshot that they are
 offering to a bunch of people to come look at with them for comments,
 feedback, prep whathever.

 Also worth keeping in mind is that the RC to partners does not prevent
 one of those partners from publishing the sources if they want for code
 where licensing and their agreement with Red Hat permits them to. I am
 not in a position to comment on that since I have neither seen the
 agreement that Red Hat have in place for these said partners, nor am I
 one of them.
 http://www.redhat.com/partners/

This is an interesting list. And to me, sending out a RC to a small 
selection of the partners is a grand idea. Looks like this partner list 
includes just about any aspect of real world computing. For instance, I 
would want my RC to be installed on as many new and varied computer 
systems as possible to check for compatibility issues. Each of these 
partner groups has a specialty. Seems extremely logical to send a RC out 
to them. Also, as they are 'partners' and not the world, would this be 
any different from sharing the RC around within the RedHat offices?

Either way, this thread is really sounding a lot like we are just 
getting antsy for CentOS 6! ;) I'm chomping at the bit for like 2 years 
now. Fortunately I selected a titanium bit because if I ever manage to 
chew through it, I must migrate to Fedora. :)  Patience grasshopper.

Can we start asking when CentOS 7 is going to be released now? HAH!!!

Thanks CentOS team!

John Hinton
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-19 Thread m . roth
John Hinton wrote:
snip
 Either way, this thread is really sounding a lot like we are just
 getting antsy for CentOS 6! ;) I'm chomping at the bit for like 2 years
 now. Fortunately I selected a titanium bit because if I ever manage to
 chew through it, I must migrate to Fedora. :)  Patience grasshopper.

Um, don't do it. Fedora is bleeding edge, not leading edge. Do you
*really* want to update every few days, and spend your time debugging the
o/s?

   mark

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


[CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-18 Thread Timo Schoeler
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

There's progress...

http://press.redhat.com/2010/10/18/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-release-candidate-available-to-partners/

Cheers,

Timo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFMvEWlfg746kcGBOwRAtHpAJ9/ylHRb8hAIBp4mvaNSPN36qrkzACfafrY
628MfhiRdSkK+9FWRuE8wJQ=
=NtpF
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-18 Thread Tom Bishop
+1 can't wait

On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:03 AM, Timo Schoeler
timo.schoe...@riscworks.netwrote:

 -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
 Hash: SHA1

 There's progress...


 http://press.redhat.com/2010/10/18/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-release-candidate-available-to-partners/

 Cheers,

 Timo
 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
 Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

 iD8DBQFMvEWlfg746kcGBOwRAtHpAJ9/ylHRb8hAIBp4mvaNSPN36qrkzACfafrY
 628MfhiRdSkK+9FWRuE8wJQ=
 =NtpF
 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
 ___
 CentOS mailing list
 CentOS@centos.org
 http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos


Re: [CentOS] FYI: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Release Candidate Available to Partners

2010-10-18 Thread Deyan Stoykov
Timo Schoeler wrote:
 
 There's progress...
 
 http://press.redhat.com/2010/10/18/red-hat-enterprise-linux-6-release-candidate-available-to-partners/
 
 Cheers,
 
 Timo

Available to partners? Aren't RH obliged to release the source as usual?

Cheers,

Deyan

-- 
Deyan Stoykov, dstoy...@uni-ruse.bg
System administrator
University of Ruse
___
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos