Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
Le Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 10:06:01AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf a écrit : Excess repetition makes many of us regulars pay less attention to the topics. I'll mention this specific example, trying not to make it into an ad-hominem: Francesco has a *great* license comprehension and comparison skill, much greater than mine, and I appreciate reading his messages when I am starting, or have time, or am in a good mood. But I know there is a very high probability his mails will include a Well, but remember I don't think any CC licenses are as good as GPLv2! paragraph. So, Francesco: I will also tune in with Steve's request. I think your point would be better driven if not constantly repeated. And you would find this crowd much more likely to accept your ideas. Hello everybody, I think that this discussion is going completely out of proportions. Francesco always makes sure that his replies contain an informative answer. In the last part of his emails, he adds his point of view in a way that it is very clear that it is not Debian's. People who already read it can easily skip it, just like email signatures. If Debian bans Francesco from this list, I will fee very ashamed of us. Also, with such a low threshold for banning people who are polite, precise, who do not engage into flamewars, and never show aggressivity, we will set the stage for massive purge and witch-hunting, because of many people are within the treshold. Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130903062927.gc19...@falafel.plessy.net
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
2013/9/3 Charles Plessy ple...@debian.org Le Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 10:06:01AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf a écrit : Excess repetition makes many of us regulars pay less attention to the topics. I'll mention this specific example, trying not to make it into an ad-hominem: Francesco has a *great* license comprehension and comparison skill, much greater than mine, and I appreciate reading his messages when I am starting, or have time, or am in a good mood. But I know there is a very high probability his mails will include a Well, but remember I don't think any CC licenses are as good as GPLv2! paragraph. So, Francesco: I will also tune in with Steve's request. I think your point would be better driven if not constantly repeated. And you would find this crowd much more likely to accept your ideas. Hello everybody, I think that this discussion is going completely out of proportions. Francesco always makes sure that his replies contain an informative answer. In the last part of his emails, he adds his point of view in a way that it is very clear that it is not Debian's. People who already read it can easily skip it, just like email signatures. If Debian bans Francesco from this list, I will fee very ashamed of us. Also, with such a low threshold for banning people who are polite, precise, who do not engage into flamewars, and never show aggressivity, we will set the stage for massive purge and witch-hunting, because of many people are within the treshold. Hi, I wasn't planning on participating in this discussion but, as you said, it has gotten so out of proportions that I thought it wouldn't be that bad after all. I share Charles' and Gunnar's point of view, I appreciate Francesco's contributions to the mailing list and, even though Gunnar is right about the high probability of his mails including something like that, it doesn't bother me as much as seems to bother other people here. His contributions are always polite, reasoned and respectful, and I appreciate that. Just for the record, even though I might not agree with his point of view about some things, I prefer debian-legal with the presence of Francesco, and I honestly don't see any reason why a ban should even be considered. At least that's my point of view. Greetings, Miry
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Miriam Ruiz wrote: I wasn't planning on participating in this discussion but, as you said, it has gotten so out of proportions that I thought it wouldn't be that bad after all. I share Charles' and Gunnar's point of view, I appreciate Francesco's contributions to the mailing list and, even though Gunnar is right about the high probability of his mails including something like that, it doesn't bother me as much as seems to bother other people here. His contributions are always polite, reasoned and respectful, and I appreciate that. Just for the record, even though I might not agree with his point of view about some things, I prefer debian-legal with the presence of Francesco, and I honestly don't see any reason why a ban should even be considered. At least that's my point of view. I agree with Miriam here. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caktje6gnuz-nyfgfaiuod-c-k4nqzquynh8x3x4g-twqvum...@mail.gmail.com
Re: [OT] Re: AGPL request for summary of recent discussion
On 02/09/13 21:27, Thorsten Glaser wrote: MJ Ray mjr at phonecoop.coop writes: whether software follows the DFSG or not, yet the number of subscribers seems to be generally increasing towards some asymptote http://lists.debian.org/stats/debian-legal.png You know that l.d.o is not the only interface to those lists, right? Yes, but we have good usage data on that interface and I've no evidence that subscription is stronger or weaker on other interfaces. I doubt any usage data shows considering unsubscribing clearly either, but if anyone has more comprehensive data, I'm happy to defer to it. [...] how does someone convince others without explaining the problems? I never said he shouldn’t explain the problems. I merely suggested he explain it in places where they can be addressed instead of in the place where Debian contributors go when they want advice on the project’s position on something, or sth. like that. Even though I sometimes prod people to concentrate on vital topics with questions like what software in debian is this about?, I've been reminded often enough that this list's charter (Discussions about legality issues such as copyrights, patents etc) doesn't limit it to stating or even developing the project's position. I'm wondering what places. It already happens on the bug tracker, as noted earlier in this discussion. It happened on the FSF drafting interface, as far as people were able, for all the notice they took of many comments. I wouldn't suggest raising the AGPL's drawbacks in the list or forum or MUC of each package released under it. If no-one wants to explain where/how they feel licence interpretation differences should be explained more usefully/less annoyingly, I'll regard this as EOT from me too. Regards, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire (including development) at http://www.software.coop/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5225bf31.9080...@phonecoop.coop
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
On 01/09/13 16:39, Paul Tagliamonte wrote: Perhaps you'd be interested in helping: http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2013/01/msg00043.html I'll make a better attempt to move this forwards later, but just as a status update on that suggestion: I think Charles and I both subscribed to debian-dak as suggested in that message, I've done a bit of -l10n-english-style language tidyup work, but debian-dak doesn't seem to do anything relevant to licensing as far as I've seen so far. Confused, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire (including development) at http://www.software.coop/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5225c09f.5040...@phonecoop.coop
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
On 02/09/13 16:06, Gunnar Wolf wrote: But when an issue becomes such a FAQ (or FRT - Frequently Repeated Topic), more efficient ways should be found. For example, we could request the listmasters to add this information as a (short, one-line) disclaimer to every post to the list, together with the instructions on how to subscribe / unsubscribe. Should we move http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq under http://www.debian.org/legal/licenses/ and update it to include that? (Ironically, dfsg-faq seems to have no copyright licence, but I'll assume that's not going to be a problem.) Regards, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire (including development) at http://www.software.coop/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5225c20b.2030...@phonecoop.coop
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 03/09/13 04:13, Steve Langasek wrote: Francesco, if you want to get Debian to *change its position* on licenses where you think an error has been made, please start a discussion in an appropriate forum such as debian-project and Cc: the ftp team. debian-legal is not and never has been the place to get changes made to the policy [...] Dear Listmasters and debian-legal, Whatever else, the complaint about abuse by over-repetition seems valid, but I'm not sure what terms of reference listmasters use to review complaints. http://bugs.debian.org/536575 is still open. However, the above descriptions of debian-project and debian-legal are rather misleading. Positions on licences have been developed on debian-legal many times, while debian-project mainly was used when there were wider whole-project concerns. At the moment, the official descriptions of the two lists are: debian-legal - Copyright, licensing and patent issues; Discussions about legality issues such as copyrights, patents etc. debian-project - Discussions about non-technical issues in the project; Discussion about non-technical topics related to the Debian Project. I suggest adding related to the Debian Project. Please summarise non-Debian personal opinions on your website rather than this list. to the description of debian-legal but I feel it would be unfair to punish someone today for exceeding a restriction not yet written down, so let's revisit it a month or so after that sort of change. I will submit the list topic change as a wishlist bug Real Soon Now unless I'm told not to. Regards, - -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op http://koha-community.org supporter, web and library systems developer. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire (including development) at http://www.software.coop/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJSJcX3AAoJELJrzKUj/txjT5IP/3jrlduJb4UA9/8O5uf7Bh4O n258fsZg3/43Bz79Ge8VrqRzodqMaf2UIR9NhHR/wHZjKNLNrbN9LgoJ7GDjE5VZ /pAeXAsGtyn1Quwjtd1Yrl3yIl54qZVnITCaGhEeSaYAw1d7y1ga+gj6RQTAlWtc D8L0RTd6GytruqKTElELW3jz1Gv75pWtf2kUud+yiun2kPhMPpff5iDLyIfTVcfL ga4pCuGgL5XPXiqWkDXtgBbPgVHni1ROBcJhIzROPgiIXMGVuXzoQMlObbscHIUE PzuJ4Kzx779c2TeAtZtD88RRKR42sioHK5R7d9Qn5kFFts8o0ApW62o26Eqgtiib LHbZieaYie8Xr9NQF5Mhw6Qdd7MjoeyEbt5VYLM6CYbnfBmKAyP4VOXJXHH7+lDF P2EF+LFpz4V2OizuZQEKRlmlEUoK1ey73rRQeorLnz1wyLka/fTsQ7WiVnGzH1xJ zGsdDsU4kq/sLNwEBbjFP/UV92KRw8txWdVQIS9gBRVZpMQR6mhMwbFP0AVMnnzJ 6TF3boi5DaINwRgYuekjkIAS22xw8WDeOw3w/5z76zX00GsBySwgYtSiOO24ummO I9eNHSU/OHjAlVYX/0BuOrYBbvT4S800BPgL2jLxNr648dOgb1UGlMrz1S0QcVyV hPme/05pLTjrvIYRT02a =FeKb -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5225c5f7.9020...@phonecoop.coop
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
Miriam Ruiz dijo [Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:43:22AM +0200]: I wasn't planning on participating in this discussion but, as you said, it has gotten so out of proportions that I thought it wouldn't be that bad after all. I share Charles' and Gunnar's point of view, I appreciate Francesco's contributions to the mailing list and, even though Gunnar is right about the high probability of his mails including something like that, it doesn't bother me as much as seems to bother other people here. His contributions are always polite, reasoned and respectful, and I appreciate that. Just for the record, even though I might not agree with his point of view about some things, I prefer debian-legal with the presence of Francesco, and I honestly don't see any reason why a ban should even be considered. At least that's my point of view. And FWIW from my side, I did not attempt to imply (and would quite oppose any suggestions to it) to ban Francesco. I also find his commentary interesting and helpful, as I said in my previous mail; I did want to point out what I feel (and what I feel that others feel, but the more indirection you add to it, the fuzzier it becomes) that tires some people. Mark me as surprised. I did not see a ban request coming, and am yet to understand where it is. What I understand is that some mails in the thread, mine included, are a request (explicitly to Francesco, but implicitly to anybody else sharing this pattern) to reduce the repetition of personal viewpoint. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130903125819.ga122...@gwolf.org
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
Steve Langasek dijo [Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 08:13:30PM -0700]: (...) Since Francesco has made it clear that he has no intention to stop his abusive use of debian-legal (see below) or even recognize why his behavior is problematic, I am asking the listmasters to ban him from this mailing list. Oh, there is the request. Listmasters, you will notice this request is part of a larger thread, where Francesco's usage pattern is discussed by many people. While I am part of the people requesting Francesco to change his reiteration and, as Steve aptly puts it, using d-legal as a soapbox, I have seen *much* more aggressive/destructive patterns in many other of our lists. I do not think there is consensus about banning a knowledgeable person with interesting viewpoints (but a tendency to reiterate what we all know already). So, my request is for you _not_ to ban him, but for Francesco to tone down. Yes, this might re-escalate later on, and things might be re-evaluated. But talking about banning him _now_ is IMO too soon, too harsh. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:04:20AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote: Steve Langasek dijo [Mon, Sep 02, 2013 at 08:13:30PM -0700]: So, my request is for you _not_ to ban him, but for Francesco to tone down. Yes, this might re-escalate later on, and things might be re-evaluated. But talking about banning him _now_ is IMO too soon, too harsh. There is nothing soon about this. I have been telling Francesco for *years* to stop pushing his personal agenda on this mailing list, and it was a mistake on my part to not follow up with the listmasters sooner. The fact that he is a prolific poster who is otherwise knowledgeable makes the effect of his misuse *worse*, not better. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 03:29:27PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: I think that this discussion is going completely out of proportions. Francesco always makes sure that his replies contain an informative answer. In the last part of his emails, he adds his point of view in a way that it is very clear that it is not Debian's. People who already read it can easily skip it, just like email signatures. You are missing the point. The problem is not that such content annoys regulars. The problem is that people who are *not* regulars, including both Debian maintainers who are only casually involved in licensing questions and upstreams who are seeking advice about how to get their software into Debian. This list is the face of Debian to the outside world on licensing questions. Francesco has shown he is not willing to leave his personal opinions aside on this list; we should therefore not allow him to act as part of Debian's face. If Debian bans Francesco from this list, I will fee very ashamed of us. If Debian fails to ban Francesco from this list, the list should be disbanded. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
Francesco Poli has been a longtime subscriber to the debian-legal mailing list. He has quite extensive knowledge about licensing, and is often the first person to answer inquiries about new licenses sent to the list. Not only that, but he reaches out to help you personally and does an excellent job on giving a fair shake to opposing view points. It'd be a serious loss without his involvement, even if I disagree with him. However, he also consistently, repeatedly uses the list to tell people about his personal positions on licenses where these disagree with the position taken on behalf of the project by the Debian ftp team. Worst things have happened. *yawn* Best, Clark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1378235120.30845.17486957.287f1...@webmail.messagingengine.com
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 11:08:17AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 03:29:27PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: I think that this discussion is going completely out of proportions. Francesco always makes sure that his replies contain an informative answer. In the last part of his emails, he adds his point of view in a way that it is very clear that it is not Debian's. People who already read it can easily skip it, just like email signatures. You are missing the point. The problem is not that such content annoys regulars. The problem is that people who are *not* regulars, including both Debian maintainers who are only casually involved in licensing questions and upstreams who are seeking advice about how to get their software into Debian. ... are bombarded with such statements. This list is the face of Debian to the outside world on licensing questions. Francesco has shown he is not willing to leave his personal opinions aside on this list; we should therefore not allow him to act as part of Debian's face. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: data and software licence incompatabilities?
While I may be considered a lurker on these lists, I have found Francesco's feedback consistently insightful and thoughtful. I may not always agree with some aspects of his views, but I fully believe a ban would be an unwarranted and brash measure. Regards, Philip Paradis On 9/3/13 07:58 , Gunnar Wolf wrote: Miriam Ruiz dijo [Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 08:43:22AM +0200]: I wasn't planning on participating in this discussion but, as you said, it has gotten so out of proportions that I thought it wouldn't be that bad after all. I share Charles' and Gunnar's point of view, I appreciate Francesco's contributions to the mailing list and, even though Gunnar is right about the high probability of his mails including something like that, it doesn't bother me as much as seems to bother other people here. His contributions are always polite, reasoned and respectful, and I appreciate that. Just for the record, even though I might not agree with his point of view about some things, I prefer debian-legal with the presence of Francesco, and I honestly don't see any reason why a ban should even be considered. At least that's my point of view. And FWIW from my side, I did not attempt to imply (and would quite oppose any suggestions to it) to ban Francesco. I also find his commentary interesting and helpful, as I said in my previous mail; I did want to point out what I feel (and what I feel that others feel, but the more indirection you add to it, the fuzzier it becomes) that tires some people. Mark me as surprised. I did not see a ban request coming, and am yet to understand where it is. What I understand is that some mails in the thread, mine included, are a request (explicitly to Francesco, but implicitly to anybody else sharing this pattern) to reduce the repetition of personal viewpoint. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/5226a98e.3070...@palegray.net
