2011/11/18 Martin Helm <mar...@mhelm.de>: > Am 18.11.2011 21:11, schrieb Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso: >> Please accept my apology again if I have upset you personally. I would >> like to make amends and not make you feel like I am the only one who >> is correct. - Jordi G. H. > I am sorry, let us keep it civilized with that I also address myself, I > violated my own terms to behave not in a personal injuring way, I > apologize for doing that. > There are these days. > > Back to the topic. I think it is clear from what I originally wrote that > there are good reasons not to host many (if any at all) packages which > interface to non-free software. To explicitly summarize my thoughts: > > 1) it is not really the right place where it should be (it should be > part of the service of the software vendor of the non-free software of > course respecting the license restrictions which come from interfacing > to a GPL software) > > 2) it cannot be guaranteed that such packages have a reasonable quality > if not directly provided by the vendor since the software it interfaces > to is out of control of a person who does not work for the vendor and is > likely to fail sooner or later when the software it interfaces to is > changed in an incompatible way > > 3) contradicts the idea to encourage the use of free software also for > third party packages (as far as free software exists for the use case > under question) > > I did not look at all packages in the non-free section to judge if there > is one which makes sense to be hosted since there is simply no free > alternative which can be found or not. > What I would see as a cut of the freedom of the user would be if > packages are somehow simply deleted which are not hosted anywhere else > and which then would be lost for potential users without looking in > advance for a place where they are better served. > > Hope that makes it clear. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure > contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, > security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this > data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d > _______________________________________________ > Octave-dev mailing list > Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev >
Hi everybody, First of all I congratulate the courtesy in your behavior. Well done! and example of intelligent behavior. I do not have so well formed opinions about licencing and this discussion is helping a lot. Thanks for that too. Now, I would like to propose a concrete solution and we can see if it is acceptable or not and if not how we can modify it till we arrive to a solution. I focused on the idea that "We are not against of wrappers of non-free software, but we will not distribute them actively". Therefore: A. Assuming we accept non-free packages in the server. A1. The packages should not be possible to install via Octaves interpreter (Otherwise Octave would be actively distributing them). A2. Octave-dev mailing list should not respond to bug reports or features request for those packages. In case of such mails we will politely suggest to contact the vendor/developer of the wrapper. B. Assuming we DO NOT accept packages on the server (that is remove non-free folder and do not accept submissions of non-free software anymore). B1. We could have a list of the Wiki where vendors and developers of such packages can add links to their download pages. This page should have a clear disclaimer about Octave not endorsing, not maintaining and not being responsible for the content of those links (I see this as passive distribution of non-free packages). B2. Same as A2. My two cents, -- M. Sc. Juan Pablo Carbajal ----- PhD Student University of Zürich http://ailab.ifi.uzh.ch/carbajal/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ Octave-dev mailing list Octave-dev@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/octave-dev
