Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
On 04/04/2012 06:01 AM, Miriam Ruiz wrote: Hi, According to strace, when running scratch on the latest squeak-vm the system seems to be waiting forever to several resources that do not exist: - /usr/share/icons/DMZ-White/cursors/041870e1c79f7f3e7cc803061830 - /usr/share/pixmaps/DMZ-White/cursors/041870e1c79f7f3e7cc803061830 - /home/inniyah/.icons/DMZ-White/cursors/041870e1c79f7f3e7cc803061830 The funny thing is that it seems that the older machine was also looking for them, and didn't find them, but kept trying for a couple of times and then went on. I don't know where these numbers come from, ¿any ideas? Hi Miry, I asked John Maloney, the lead developer of Scratch, and he said that those cursor paths aren't part of the Scratch code. So it sounds like it's a VM issue. Sorry we can't be more helpful... -Amos -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
2012/4/5 Amos Blanton a...@scratch.mit.edu: According to strace, when running scratch on the latest squeak-vm the system seems to be waiting forever to several resources that do not exist: - /usr/share/icons/DMZ-White/cursors/041870e1c79f7f3e7cc803061830 - /usr/share/pixmaps/DMZ-White/cursors/041870e1c79f7f3e7cc803061830 - /home/inniyah/.icons/DMZ-White/cursors/041870e1c79f7f3e7cc803061830 The funny thing is that it seems that the older machine was also looking for them, and didn't find them, but kept trying for a couple of times and then went on. I don't know where these numbers come from, żany ideas? Hi Miry, I asked John Maloney, the lead developer of Scratch, and he said that those cursor paths aren't part of the Scratch code. So it sounds like it's a VM issue. Sorry we can't be more helpful... Lots of thanks, knowing that the problem does not lay within Scratch itself is indeed very useful :) Greetings, Miry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
I've just found out something that might be a problem: Scratch Support materials (/Help), sample Media files (/Media), and sample projects (/Projects), are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0) license. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA. While Debian recognizes as DFSG-free CC BY-SA 3.0, there were AFAIK issues with the version 2.0 of the license that were considered not DFSG-free. Would there be any possibility of relicensing this stuff as CC BY-SA 3.0 instead of the current 2.0 version? Greetings and thanks, Miry PS: I'll keep working on the latest VM issues meanwhile. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
No problem. The license will be updated in the next version of the source package: 1.4.0.5. (Which I will release as soon as I address other small issues that have come up.) If you find anything else, let me know. On 04/05/2012 11:35 AM, Miriam Ruiz wrote: I've just found out something that might be a problem: Scratch Support materials (/Help), sample Media files (/Media), and sample projects (/Projects), are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0) license. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 444 Castro Street, Suite 900, Mountain View, California, 94041, USA. While Debian recognizes as DFSG-free CC BY-SA 3.0, there were AFAIK issues with the version 2.0 of the license that were considered not DFSG-free. Would there be any possibility of relicensing this stuff as CC BY-SA 3.0 instead of the current 2.0 version? Greetings and thanks, Miry PS: I'll keep working on the latest VM issues meanwhile. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
2012/4/5 Amos Blanton a...@scratch.mit.edu: No problem. The license will be updated in the next version of the source package: 1.4.0.5. (Which I will release as soon as I address other small issues that have come up.) If you find anything else, let me know. Cool! You're great! :) Greetings, Miry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
2012/3/31 Allison Randal alli...@ubuntu.com: On 03/30/2012 04:10 PM, Miriam Ruiz wrote: It works for me with squeak-vm 4.0.3.2202 (squeeze) but when trying to run it on squeak-vm 4.4.7 (wheezy) I just get a black screen [1] [2] According to jredrejo, the modification causing this problem might be related to the changes made to the squeak-vm to be able to run it with composite managers and compiz. Okay, makes sense. Ubuntu is shipping squeak-vm 4.4.7 in both Oneiric and Precise, so we'd have to wait on a fix for this too. Hi, According to strace, when running scratch on the latest squeak-vm the system seems to be waiting forever to several resources that do not exist: - /usr/share/icons/DMZ-White/cursors/041870e1c79f7f3e7cc803061830 - /usr/share/pixmaps/DMZ-White/cursors/041870e1c79f7f3e7cc803061830 - /home/inniyah/.icons/DMZ-White/cursors/041870e1c79f7f3e7cc803061830 The funny thing is that it seems that the older machine was also looking for them, and didn't find them, but kept trying for a couple of times and then went on. I don't know where these numbers come from, ¿any ideas? Greetings and thanks, Miry PS: I'm attaching a file with part of the results when running the program output Description: Binary data
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
2012/4/4 Benj. Mako Hill m...@debian.org: I'm pretty sure that the changes to the website make it clear that the website terms of use and the trademark license are not additional copyright terms. I also think that the current text describing the trademark license make it clear that re-packaging is fine while using the marks (it says as much) so I don't forsee that this will be a problem getting things into Debian. Yup, I agree with your POV here. I don't expect big problems from ftpmasters, I hope we're right :) Of course, folks should know that changes to the license were done in order to help Scratch into Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc. If there happen to be any lingering concerns, we can probably work with the Scratch team to get them address. Yup, Definitely! Thanks to Miry and everyone else whose working on this! I'm really looking forward to finally getting Scratch in Debian! Lots of thanks to you too!!! I hope to be able to make it work properly in latest squeak-vm soon!!! :) Greetings, Miry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
2012/4/4 Michael Hanke m...@debian.org: On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:08:17PM +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote: 2012/4/4 Benj. Mako Hill m...@debian.org: I also think that the current text describing the trademark license make it clear that re-packaging is fine while using the marks (it says as much) so I don't forsee that this will be a problem getting things into Debian. Yup, I agree with your POV here. I don't expect big problems from ftpmasters, I hope we're right :) A more fundamental issue could be a potential show stopper. Take a look at the etoys package -- technically similar, FOSS license, but still in non-free. Below a full quote from the source package's README.nonfree: As long as the image itself is the source the preferred format for modification) and is included in the package with a free license, my opinion is that DFSG's are fulfilled. If ftpmasters don't see it that way, we'll have to push the conflict upwards. I don't plan on uploading it to non-free, as it is indeed a free package. Lets wait and see, though, and move from there when/if it happens. For the moment I'm more concerned about making it work with latest squeak-vm :) Greetings and thanks, Miry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:08:17PM +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote: 2012/4/4 Benj. Mako Hill m...@debian.org: I also think that the current text describing the trademark license make it clear that re-packaging is fine while using the marks (it says as much) so I don't forsee that this will be a problem getting things into Debian. Yup, I agree with your POV here. I don't expect big problems from ftpmasters, I hope we're right :) A more fundamental issue could be a potential show stopper. Take a look at the etoys package -- technically similar, FOSS license, but still in non-free. Below a full quote from the source package's README.nonfree: Why is EToys in non-free? = EToys was rejected from inclusion in the Debian main archive, because the ftpmasters don't consider the sources as source. ;) Since we unsuccessfully tried to convince them that EToys belongs into main already and the time until Lenny will be frozen is short, I decided to upload it to non-free, for the benefit of the users (so they can simply use apt-get to install etoys, provided they have non-free in their sources), even though we believe it satisfies all the requirements of the DFSG [1] and policy [2]. For Lenny+1 we plan to convince the ftpmasters to accept it in main. Let me explain the source situation: EToys comes as an image, a snapshot of all objects, which is loaded into a squeakvm, modified in memory, and snapshotted to an image file again. This image cannot easily be rebuilt from pure source code, but the snapshots do contain all the source code. The image is the preferred form of modification for the EToys developer community, this is how they work [3]. The Etoys image is derived from a Squeak image which is derived from a Smalltalk image back to 1976, when the actual bootstrapping happened. This is in contrast to how some Lisps work, they do a lengthy bootstrap from source and then do a memory snapshot so they can skip the initialization at startup time. To modify that snapshot, one changes the code and rebuilds the snapshot. But in Smalltalk, to modify the snapshot all the source code tools patch live object memory directly. So we think this kind of source form is enough to satisfy the DFSG. Squeak source code in text form can be seen, shared and modified from within the squeakvm. That's what everybody does with Squeak source code. The changes are then either available as change sets or as Monticello packages (a version control system for Smalltalk code, see [4]), and can be distributed separatly or used to create derived versions of the modified blobs. But while this works for small changes, this isn't practical to rebuild a complete image. [1] http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines [2] file:///usr/share/doc/debian-policy/policy.html [3] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2008-May/128753.html [4] http://www.wiresong.ca/Monticello/ Holger Levsen, 2008-06-13 -- Michael Hanke http://mih.voxindeserto.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
On 04/04/2012 08:18 AM, Miriam Ruiz wrote: 2012/4/4 Michael Hanke m...@debian.org: On Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 12:08:17PM +0200, Miriam Ruiz wrote: 2012/4/4 Benj. Mako Hill m...@debian.org: I also think that the current text describing the trademark license make it clear that re-packaging is fine while using the marks (it says as much) so I don't forsee that this will be a problem getting things into Debian. Yup, I agree with your POV here. I don't expect big problems from ftpmasters, I hope we're right :) A more fundamental issue could be a potential show stopper. Take a look at the etoys package -- technically similar, FOSS license, but still in non-free. Below a full quote from the source package's README.nonfree: As long as the image itself is the source the preferred format for modification) and is included in the package with a free license, my opinion is that DFSG's are fulfilled. If ftpmasters don't see it that way, we'll have to push the conflict upwards. I don't plan on uploading it to non-free, as it is indeed a free package. Lets wait and see, though, and move from there when/if it happens. For the moment I'm more concerned about making it work with latest squeak-vm :) Thanks Miry. :) 1. We didn't include the Squeak "changes" file with the previous tarball release, but I've added it to an updated tarball that's now available (1.4.0.4). All the source is present and modifiable. In addition, we've added instructions for changing the Squeak image from "user" to "dev" mode into the README file. Dev mode makes it easy to browse and modify the source code in the image. This has long been documented on our wiki: http://wiki.scratch.mit.edu/wiki/Shift-Click-R , as the Scratch community has made dozens of mods of the Scratch Source code since we originally released it, years ago. 2. There is a possible issue having to do with sound primitives that JohnM mentioned to me. It was brought to his attention by Bert Freudenberg. Apparently, some sound primitives were changed in Squeak at some point, and the Scratch source wasn't updated, because we were using the same old VM. Bert knows more about this, and can perhaps elaborate. I'm not certain you'll encounter it, but I thought I'd give you a heads up in case problems with Scratch and newer VMs crop up and seem to be related to sound primitives. 3. re: Free vs. not free. The arguments quoted to me don't seem to me to make a lot of practical sense. But perhaps we can all get together and argue the case to the FTP masters when the time is right (with folks from Etoys, if they'd still like to see Etoys in free?) Best, Amos Greetings and thanks, Miry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
quote who=Michael Hanke date=Wed, Apr 04, 2012 at 02:08:14PM +0200 A more fundamental issue could be a potential show stopper. Take a look at the etoys package -- technically similar, FOSS license, but still in non-free. This sounds like confusion. In any case, the FTP masters are a different group now and I think this is tractable. Regards, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill m...@atdot.cc http://mako.cc/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. --GNU Manifesto signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
quote who=Amos Blanton date=Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 04:42:22PM -0400 We've made some changes to page that describes the source code on our site, and also made a minor update to a license file in the source package, all based on suggestions from Mako Hill and friends from the free software community. http://info.scratch.mit.edu/Source_Code I hope we can alleviate any concerns folks at Debian might have about making Scratch available in the Debian repositories. Don't hesitate to contact me if you have questions or concerns. I'm pretty sure that the changes to the website make it clear that the website terms of use and the trademark license are not additional copyright terms. I also think that the current text describing the trademark license make it clear that re-packaging is fine while using the marks (it says as much) so I don't forsee that this will be a problem getting things into Debian. Of course, folks should know that changes to the license were done in order to help Scratch into Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, etc. If there happen to be any lingering concerns, we can probably work with the Scratch team to get them address. Thanks to Miry and everyone else whose working on this! I'm really looking forward to finally getting Scratch in Debian! Later, Mako -- Benjamin Mako Hill m...@debian.org http://mako.cc/ Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as society is free to use the results. --GNU Manifesto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
Hi Allison, Miry - We've made some changes to page that describes the source code on our site, and also made a minor update to a license file in the source package, all based on suggestions from Mako Hill and friends from the free software community. http://info.scratch.mit.edu/Source_Code I hope we can alleviate any concerns folks at Debian might have about making Scratch available in the Debian repositories. Don't hesitate to contact me if you have questions or concerns. -Amos On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:09 PM, Amos Blanton a...@scratch.mit.edu wrote: On 03/28/2012 10:35 PM, Allison Randal wrote: Double-check on the DFSG and the Scratch trademark policy. The code itself will be fine under the DFSG, but the trademark policy may not satisfy The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software. Worst-case, Debian would just need to use a different name/logo, like it does with Iceweasel and Icedove. Hi Allison, Mako Hill was kind enough to gather some suggestions related to our policy from an IRC chat with some debian folks. We're reviewing these suggestions, and anticipate making some clarifications soon. I'll send an update to this list when we do. I really hope we won't have to do the iceweasel thing, and my understanding is that our trademark policy does not conflict with the DFSG. -Amos Allison -- _ Amos
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
2012/3/30 Allison Randal alli...@ubuntu.com: From the Ubuntu side, my only question is how far along are the changes to run on the Ubuntu squeak packages instead of bundling a version of the squeak VM in the scratch packages? I see the work mainly around revisions 78-79 in the scratch packaging svn on Assembla: It works for me with squeak-vm 4.0.3.2202 (squeeze) but when trying to run it on squeak-vm 4.4.7 (wheezy) I just get a black screen [1] [2] According to jredrejo, the modification causing this problem might be related to the changes made to the squeak-vm to be able to run it with composite managers and compiz. Greetings, Miry [1] http://scratch.mit.edu/forums/viewtopic.php?id=78617 [2] http://www.raspberrypi.org/forum/educational-applications/scratch-on-raspberry-pi-and-other-linuxes -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
On 03/30/2012 04:10 PM, Miriam Ruiz wrote: It works for me with squeak-vm 4.0.3.2202 (squeeze) but when trying to run it on squeak-vm 4.4.7 (wheezy) I just get a black screen [1] [2] According to jredrejo, the modification causing this problem might be related to the changes made to the squeak-vm to be able to run it with composite managers and compiz. Okay, makes sense. Ubuntu is shipping squeak-vm 4.4.7 in both Oneiric and Precise, so we'd have to wait on a fix for this too. Allison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
2012/3/28 Amos Blanton a...@scratch.mit.edu: The Scratch Team has re-released the Scratch 1.4 source code under the GPL v2. This is great news! :) On 03/28/2012 01:34 PM, Miriam Ruiz wrote: Yay! I'm going to package it for Debian Double-check on the DFSG and the Scratch trademark policy. The code itself will be fine under the DFSG, but the trademark policy may not satisfy The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software. Worst-case, Debian would just need to use a different name/logo, like it does with Iceweasel and Icedove. Allison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#471927: [Scratch] Scratch 1.4 source code released under GPL v2
On 03/28/2012 10:35 PM, Allison Randal wrote: Double-check on the DFSG and the Scratch trademark policy. The code itself will be fine under the DFSG, but the trademark policy may not satisfy The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software. Worst-case, Debian would just need to use a different name/logo, like it does with Iceweasel and Icedove. Hi Allison, Mako Hill was kind enough to gather some suggestions related to our policy from an IRC chat with some debian folks. We're reviewing these suggestions, and anticipate making some clarifications soon. I'll send an update to this list when we do. I really hope we won't have to do the iceweasel thing, and my understanding is that our trademark policy does not conflict with the DFSG. -Amos Allison -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
