[Babel-users] Babel on FreeBSD
Hello, list. The latest (0.99.17.8) release of Quagga-RE incorporates babeld, and FreeBSD quagga-re port seems to deliver it in a way: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/net/quagga-re/pkg-plist.diff?r1=1.1;r2=1.2;f=h I don't currently have the time to test it. Could someone test this port? -- Denis Ovsienko ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
[Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
Dear all, Paul Jakma has added GPL headers to the babeld code that he has merged into Quagga. This was done against the wishes of Matthieu Boutier and myself, the main two authors of this code, and without the knowledge of the other authors. Note that Paul did not simply ask us to add GPL headers as a condition for inclusion into Quagga; he added the headers himself, without asking us for permission. I find that rude. I therefore intend to do any further work in the quagga-RE repository [1], and would like to encourage anyone wishing to experiment with Babel to work either with the standalone Babel daemon [2] or the quagga-RE version. -- Juliusz Chroboczek [1] https://github.com/Quagga-RE/quagga-RE [2] http://www.pps.jussieu.fr/~jch/software/babel/#download ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.jussieu.fr wrote: Paul Jakma has added GPL headers to the babeld code that he has merged into Quagga. This was done against the wishes of Matthieu Boutier and myself, the main two authors of this code, and without the knowledge of the other authors. If you publish your code under MIT/X11 you explicitly grant others the right to do this. Indeed, if you incorporate MIT code into a GPL project you *must* add the GPL headers to the derived work. There is no obligation to get permission from anyone to do this: you already granted permission when you published your work under MIT/X11. If Paul had removed your copyright, that would be a violation of your license. But this is not the case. So as far as I can tell, Paul Jakma has acted properly, and you and Matthieu Boutier have acted improperly in trying to redefine the terms of your license and add new restrictions after it was granted. -Pieter ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.jussieu.fr wrote: Paul Jakma has added GPL headers to the babeld code that he has merged into Quagga. This was done against the wishes of Matthieu Boutier and myself, the main two authors of this code, and without the knowledge of the other authors. If you publish your code under MIT/X11 you explicitly grant others the right to do this. Indeed, if you incorporate MIT code into a GPL project you *must* add the GPL headers to the derived work. There is no obligation to get permission from anyone to do this: you already granted permission when you published your work under MIT/X11. If Paul had removed your copyright, that would be a violation of your license. But this is not the case. So as far as I can tell, Paul Jakma has acted properly, and you and Matthieu Boutier have acted improperly in trying to redefine the terms of your license and add new restrictions after it was granted. Interesting, Curious if the same would be held true for a BSD Licensed work.. -Pieter ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 09:53:59AM -0500, Pieter Hintjens wrote: On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.jussieu.fr wrote: Paul Jakma has added GPL headers to the babeld code that he has merged into Quagga. This was done against the wishes of Matthieu Boutier and myself, the main two authors of this code, and without the knowledge of the other authors. If you publish your code under MIT/X11 you explicitly grant others the right to do this. IANAL, but I fail to see how someone who is *not* the copyright holder might have any right to add restrictions whatsoever on a piece of code. Only the copyright holder can decide the licence of their code. And if the additional GPL headers do not apply to Juliusz's and Matthieu's code, then what do they apply to and what is the point in adding them? -- Gabriel ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Gabriel Kerneis kern...@pps.jussieu.fr wrote: On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 09:53:59AM -0500, Pieter Hintjens wrote: On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.jussieu.fr wrote: Paul Jakma has added GPL headers to the babeld code that he has merged into Quagga. This was done against the wishes of Matthieu Boutier and myself, the main two authors of this code, and without the knowledge of the other authors. If you publish your code under MIT/X11 you explicitly grant others the right to do this. IANAL, but I fail to see how someone who is *not* the copyright holder might have any right to add restrictions whatsoever on a piece of code. Only the copyright holder can decide the licence of their code. And if the additional GPL headers do not apply to Juliusz's and Matthieu's code, then what do they apply to and what is the point in adding them? I would now also question the license of any code added to babel under the quagga tree with this GPL license being added, even being capable of being brought back into the mainline babel MIT Licensed code -- Gabriel ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Outback Dingo outbackdi...@gmail.com wrote: Interesting, Curious if the same would be held true for a BSD Licensed work.. Yes. Precisely the same holds for BSD licensed code, which is why for example commercial closed source projects love including that. It should be obvious that closed source is significantly more restrictive than GPL, yet no-one seems to be surprised when MIT/X11/BSD code is closed off. -Pieter ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Outback Dingo outbackdi...@gmail.com wrote: Interesting, Curious if the same would be held true for a BSD Licensed work.. Yes. Precisely the same holds for BSD licensed code, which is why for example commercial closed source projects love including that. It should be obvious that closed source is significantly more restrictive than GPL, yet no-one seems to be surprised when MIT/X11/BSD code is closed off. I dont think its about closing any of the code off, I think its more about how someone can simple add other added parameters or restrictions on the code base which was originally a more open unrestricted license -Pieter ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:22:11AM -0500, Pieter Hintjens wrote: The primary reason for using MIT/X11/BSD is precisely to allow others to *relicense* the code as they wish. Thus, I can take pieces (whole or in part) into my closed projects, licensed commercially. Or, into my GPL projects, licensed under GPLv3. Hmm, the licence grants explicitely the right to sublicence, which looks a bit different from relicence. I see your point, though. -- Gabriel ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Pieter Hintjens p...@imatix.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Outback Dingo outbackdi...@gmail.com wrote: I dont think its about closing any of the code off, I think its more about how someone can simple add other added parameters or restrictions on the code base which was originally a more open unrestricted license But you're fine with commercial software developers making closed source products based off the code base? If yes, then don't you realize you're granting them the right to add restrictions? And if no, then you really should not be using the MIT license but instead, the GPL. Perhaps the issue is that we have two sets of expectations, one for commercial developers (who we excuse when they relicense MIT/BSD/X11 code) and one for free software developers (who we expect to play by our rules). But this division is inaccurate. Even I have added a commercial encryption extension to babel, and not released it And have done development works on babel that would in some cases fall under potential government restrictions on releasing the code. Which is why babel was chosen in the first place, because it was capable and properly licensed for the purpose we needed it. I couldnt have accomplished this under the GPL, so yes from a commercial aspect, the MIT/BSD Licenses is LESS restrictive in my opinion. My strong advice is to use GPLv3 in any case, it's better for the community and creates a level playing field. Your current license favours commercial teams with no benefit to the community (no incentive to contribute back). And alot of us find the GPL to be far to restrictive when proprietary security extensions need to be applied, and its not only about commercial gain, its more about security of a software stack and the reasonable additions that can be protected when added under MIT/BSD and not under GPL in certain arenas where it benefits society, in the monitoring of various infrastructures in a secure fashion within reason. -Pieter ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: Dear all, Paul Jakma has added GPL headers to the babeld code that he has merged into Quagga. This was done against the wishes of Matthieu Boutier and myself, the main two authors of this code, and without the knowledge of the other authors. Note that Paul did not simply ask us to add GPL headers as a condition for inclusion into Quagga; he added the headers himself, without asking us for permission. I didn't do this off my own bat. I did this on behalf of the maintainers, who collectively decided on this after we: a) were asked to merge babeld by yourself b) sought legal advice from SFLC c) extensively discussed what options were open to us (one such option was to not merge) We asked SFLC whether we could distribute an MIT/X11 source-base that made use of a GPL library (which we, the maintainers, do not have exclusive copyright over - indeed, far from). We did not receive clear advice that we could. Nor are we aware of advice or clear custom elsewhere that would allow us. We are obliged to follow the licensing terms stipulated by **all** the copyright holders (i.e. not just the babeld authors), if we wish to distribute the code without fear of legal risks. This means we have to stick to the the conjunction of all applicable licensing terms, which appears to include the GPL in this case. We have however tried to make it clear to any future contributors that we want them to licence back any relevant changes to you under MIT/X11, so that you can apply them to the non-GPL-library-calling standalone babeld. Further, you were consulted in advance about this. I asked you on IRC and I emailed you about it. You clearly indicated, on several ocassions I think, that you did not care to be involved in discussions about licensing. You indicated that you had chosen MIT/X11 for babeld precisely for that reason. We have followed the SFLC guidelines on combining code that is a potential mix of GPL and more permissive licences. We were left in a very difficult position. We've done the best we can for the project. The initial import commit is at: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=quagga.git;a=commit;h=57345 The babeld/LICENCE file we committed is at: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=quagga.git;a=blob;f=babeld/LICENCE regards, -- Paul Jakma p...@jakma.org twitter: @pjakma PGP: 64A2FF6A Fortune: The National Association of Theater Concessionaires reported that in 1986, 60% of all candy sold in movie theaters was sold to Roger Ebert. -- D. Letterman ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:31 AM, Gabriel Kerneis kern...@pps.jussieu.fr wrote: Hmm, the licence grants explicitely the right to sublicence, which looks a bit different from relicence. I see your point, though. Yes, sub-license. That's why your original copyright header remains there. Legally, the BSD or MIT/X11 licenses *explicitly* grant projects under any license the right to take the code, add their own headers and sub-license the derived work. Any license includes GPL. Emotionally, the problem is that you expect free software to play by your rules. You see your work sub-licensed in a form you cannot remix back into the original code. And this seems unfair. But it's 100% fair by the rules you choose, namely your permissive license. If you insist on derived work being remixable, use GPLv3. If you don't care, use MIT/X11 or BSD. But really, you should be more aware of the full impact of the license you are using, and it is ungraceful to be angry with those who apply your rules accurately, when it's you that did not properly understand them. -Pieter ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Outback Dingo wrote: I dont think its about closing any of the code off, I think its more about how someone can simple add other added parameters or restrictions on the code base which was originally a more open unrestricted license Please see: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=quagga.git;a=blob;f=babeld/LICENCE as should be clear from this file, we have NOT tried to close off the code to the standalone, MIT/X11 licensed version of babeld which is independent of Quagga: we will require that contributions to Quagga babeld/ be MIT/X11 licensed. We have followed these SFLC guidelines, which I believe are best practice: https://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html regards, -- Paul Jakma p...@jakma.org twitter: @pjakma PGP: 64A2FF6A Fortune: Today's robots are very primitive, capable of understanding only a few simple instructions such as 'go left', 'go right', and 'build car'. --John Sladek ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
(This is kinda duplicate because Paul said more or less the same things) On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 05:12:24PM +0200, Gabriel Kerneis wrote: On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 09:53:59AM -0500, Pieter Hintjens wrote: On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.jussieu.fr wrote: Paul Jakma has added GPL headers to the babeld code that he has merged into Quagga. Â This was done against the wishes of Matthieu Boutier and myself, the main two authors of this code, and without the knowledge of the other authors. If you publish your code under MIT/X11 you explicitly grant others the right to do this. IANAL, but I fail to see how someone who is *not* the copyright holder might have any right to add restrictions whatsoever on a piece of code. Only the copyright holder can decide the licence of their code. And if the additional GPL headers do not apply to Juliusz's and Matthieu's code, then what do they apply to and what is the point in adding them? They apply to distributions of the code made from Quagga checkouts. The addition of the GPL headers was made because libzebra is GPL and quagga-babeld probably derives (in a legal sense) from libzebra. Therefore, libzebra's GPL forces GPL onto quagga-babeld. Note that we (the quagga maintainers) have made clear that we will only accept patches to quagga-babeld if the author accepts releasing them as MIT/X11. This is stated in: http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=quagga.git;a=blob;f=babeld/LICENCE;h=9da569dc28bc29673d280276d720edbeab5c3038;hb=81c3e5006e5d29e305cbc0ab482617d7e570e8c0 29 Contributors to the code in babeld/ are asked to make their work available 30 under the same MIT/X11 licence as given immediately above. Please indicate 31 your assent to this by updating this file and appending the appropriate This basically amounts to dual-licensing quagga-babeld as MIT/GPL. All contributions come with the OK for MIT license; it is only the GPL inheritance from libzebra that leaves quagga-babeld as GPL in the end. We did not make this decision lightly; it is purely motivated out of our legal consideration that libzebra is GPL and quagga-babeld is probably not allowed to link to it unless it is GPL too. We (and especially I) tried very hard to avoid this, but we were unable to get legal safety to an acceptable degree. And, well, we need to be on the safe side ourselves, and this is the safe side... -David ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
The primary reason for using MIT/X11/BSD is precisely to allow others to *relicense* the code as they wish. This is correct. Please read my initial mail again. At no point have I argued the legality of Paul's actions. I'm simply stating that I find his actions rude. And I don't enjoy working with rude people. -- Juliusz ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: Please read my initial mail again. At no point have I argued the legality of Paul's actions. I'm simply stating that I find his actions rude. And I don't enjoy working with rude people. Thanks for that. regards, -- Paul Jakma p...@jakma.org @pjakma Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: Internet shut down due to maintainance ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.jussieu.fr wrote: Please read my initial mail again. At no point have I argued the legality of Paul's actions. I'm simply stating that I find his actions rude. Everyone is of course entitled to their view of the world, but when you publish your views, expect others to respond. When you grant someone a right under an old and well-understood license, when this right and its implications are widely understood, when a group uses that right, and when that group makes every effort to reciprocate (even though nothing in your license requires that), and then you describe individuals from that group as rude, you are acting childish, naive, emotional, and hypocritical. Just for you I am now going to fork babeld, and GPL it. -Pieter ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
Re: [Babel-users] Babeld merged with GPL headers against copyright holders' wishes
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: Please read my initial mail again. At no point have I argued the legality of Paul's actions. I'm simply stating that I find his actions rude. You chose to use MIT/X11 for code that depends on other GPL code. You did so because you told us you hate dealing with licensing hassles. You then wanted us to merge it. In effect, you left the hassle for us to deal with. You *were* involved in discussions about this, and about the options we felt were open to us - but you asked not to be involved in those, after making it clear you wanted the code to remain MIT/X11. We (not just David Lamparter and I either, Greg Troxel is also an active maintainer, guidance wise) spent a good bit of time and energy trying to deal with this the last month+. We have tried to accommodate your wishes as much as we can. Again, it's *not* just the licence for your software at play here. We have to meet the licenses from *other* people's code too. We've done so while *still* going out of our way to ensure future contributions remain available to you under MIT/X11. It's just bizarre to call that rude, sorry - unless you think we're supposed to put your non-binding desires above the *binding* conditions of *other people's licences* (in addition to your licence). Perhaps in time you'll see why we had to do this. regards, -- Paul Jakma p...@jakma.org @pjakma Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: Cache miss - please take better aim next time ___ Babel-users mailing list Babel-users@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
