On Mon, Dec 1, 2025 at 12:25 PM Daniel P. Berrangé <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 11:38:10AM -0500, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Dec 2025 at 10:49, Daniel P. Berrangé <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2025 at 02:05:16PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > > > When accessing https://translate.fedoraproject.org today I was surprised > > > > to find that after authenticating with Fedora, I'm *required* to agree > > > > to new commercial / legal T&Cs before I'm now allow to access any part > > > > of the site. > > > > > > > > Weblate has been around in Fedora for a few years and so I don't recall > > > > if there was an agreement elsewhere I previously blindly ticked through > > > > when first accessing Weblate after Fedora rolled it out. The post-login > > > > mandatory agreement screen, however, is not something I remember seeing > > > > before. After the Fedora auth is done you get redirected to > > > > > > > > > > > https://translate.fedoraproject.org/legal/confirm/?next=%2Faccounts%2Fcomplete%2Ffedora-oidc%2F%3Fpartial_token%3Dxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > > > The presented terms appear to be the same as those displayed at > > > > > > > > https://weblate.org/en/terms/ > > > > > > > > IMHO an approved Fedora account should imply access to all official > > > > Fedora services including our Weblate service, with no further legal > > > > agreements to sign with 3rd party commercial companies. Especially > > > > when the service is presented under the fedoraproject.org domain > > > > and uses the Fedora auth service for accounts. > > > > > > > > > Does no one else have any comments on this ? Based on the previous > > > discussions around possible use of GitLab as a replacement for Pagure, > > > it feels like a no-brainer that this legal agreement from Weblate > > > would be inappropriate to ask of Fedora contributors. > > > > > > > > Well those of us in the US are getting back from Turkey Weekend and either > > declaring email bankruptcy or getting through the 900 emails in their > > inqueue (I still have 400 left it seems). > > Oh, right, I forgot about that holiday :-) > > > I don't think this is something > > contributors should have to agree to and it has been a killer in the past > > for other 'partnerships' we have had. At this point, I think it needs to be > > brought up with the Fedora Council (I don't think FESCO has a purview here > > over the Translation team but it might). > > Ok, I'll file a ticket with Council then.
FWIW I also think it's inappropriate. It's a pretty badly drafted set of terms, they are trying I guess to shoehorn various different things (terms for a paid service, license terms for software) in one agreement as well as failing to account for the possibility of an unpaid form of the service provided to community projects -- if that's what is the case here. With the caveat that I only skimmed the terms, I found this which seems arguably in conflict with the GPL, even if not relevant to Fedora's use case: "For the purpose of exclusive modifications of the Service solely for the benefit of the User or the creation of means to run these Services, the User may publish the Service only if, in accordance with the terms of GPLv3 (and/or later versions of the GPL license), they publish all materials to which they do not own copyright." Or perhaps an AGPL/SSPL-like overlay on top of the GPL, which if so is sort of sneaky, though their definition of "Service" suggests that refers only to the service as provided by Weblate. Richard -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
