Re: is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as a package?
Am 24.03.21 um 02:44 schrieb Kevin Kofler via devel: Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: This is the reason why MBROLA is not in Fedora. MBROLA is not new. It is much older than the 2-year-old GitHub project. The license of the voices has always been the blocker. PS: This was already discussed when the GitHub project was created in 2019: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/le...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/MAAY3B6KUVAV7YRNUSW7G6672WUAFWYJ/ with the same conclusion. (It is not acceptable for Fedora, unfortunately.) And, a small correction: according to the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBROLA the license of the software itself did actually change from a non-free license to the AGPL when the project was imported into GitHub. But unfortunately, the license of the data files is still a blocker, sorry. A very helpfull explanation. Thanks. Best regards, Marius Schwarz ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as a package?
Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > This is the reason why MBROLA is not in Fedora. MBROLA is not new. It is > much older than the 2-year-old GitHub project. The license of the voices > has always been the blocker. PS: This was already discussed when the GitHub project was created in 2019: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/le...@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/MAAY3B6KUVAV7YRNUSW7G6672WUAFWYJ/ with the same conclusion. (It is not acceptable for Fedora, unfortunately.) And, a small correction: according to the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBROLA the license of the software itself did actually change from a non-free license to the AGPL when the project was imported into GitHub. But unfortunately, the license of the data files is still a blocker, sorry. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as a package?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 9:18 PM Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > > Marius Schwarz wrote: > > is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as > > a package in a Fedora repo? > > The AGPL is acceptable for Fedora, *but*… > > > This project is meant: > > > > https://github.com/numediart/MBROLA/blob/master/LICENSE > > … MBROLA is *not*, because… > > > Example license for voices: > > > > https://github.com/numediart/MBROLA-voices/blob/master/data/de1/license.txt > > … this license is notoriously non-free: > > * It allows usage only with MBROLA: > > Permission is granted to use this database for synthesizing > > speech with and only with the Mbrola program […] > AND > * It forbids charging for the act of distributing, even as part of a larger > software distribution such as Fedora: > > In addition, this database may not be sold or incorporated into > > any product which is sold without prior permission from the > > Diphone Database Owner ( engl...@ieee.org ). > > > > When no charge is made, this database may be copied and distributed > > freely, provided that this notice is copied and distributed with it. > > and especially the latter restriction disqualifies it even for the non-free > content / binary firmware exception. Even (non-code) content and firmware > blobs *MUST* be commercially distributable to be allowed in Fedora. > > This is the reason why MBROLA is not in Fedora. MBROLA is not new. It is > much older than the 2-year-old GitHub project. The license of the voices has > always been the blocker. > Ugh, I missed that part. Whoops. Yeah, Kevin is right and this project is still not permitted in Fedora. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as a package?
Marius Schwarz wrote: > is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as > a package in a Fedora repo? The AGPL is acceptable for Fedora, *but*… > This project is meant: > > https://github.com/numediart/MBROLA/blob/master/LICENSE … MBROLA is *not*, because… > Example license for voices: > > https://github.com/numediart/MBROLA-voices/blob/master/data/de1/license.txt … this license is notoriously non-free: * It allows usage only with MBROLA: > Permission is granted to use this database for synthesizing > speech with and only with the Mbrola program […] AND * It forbids charging for the act of distributing, even as part of a larger software distribution such as Fedora: > In addition, this database may not be sold or incorporated into > any product which is sold without prior permission from the > Diphone Database Owner ( engl...@ieee.org ). > > When no charge is made, this database may be copied and distributed > freely, provided that this notice is copied and distributed with it. and especially the latter restriction disqualifies it even for the non-free content / binary firmware exception. Even (non-code) content and firmware blobs *MUST* be commercially distributable to be allowed in Fedora. This is the reason why MBROLA is not in Fedora. MBROLA is not new. It is much older than the 2-year-old GitHub project. The license of the voices has always been the blocker. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
Re: is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as a package?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 5:42 PM Marius Schwarz wrote: > > hi, > > is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as > a package in a Fedora repo? > > This project is meant: > > https://github.com/numediart/MBROLA/blob/master/LICENSE > > Example license for voices: > > https://github.com/numediart/MBROLA-voices/blob/master/data/de1/license.txt > Yes: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Good_Licenses -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as a package?
hi, is the license AGPL 3.0 useable in terms of distributing the software as a package in a Fedora repo? This project is meant: https://github.com/numediart/MBROLA/blob/master/LICENSE Example license for voices: https://github.com/numediart/MBROLA-voices/blob/master/data/de1/license.txt best regards, Marius Schwarz ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
