Re: [Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 04:25:16 - Rogério Theodoro de Brito rbr...@ime.usp.br wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 18:36, KarlGoetz k...@kgoetz.id.au wrote: Given this was filed against ubuntu when Gobuntu was being developed, I'm tempted to suggest this bug should be marked 'invalid'. OK, Took the suggestion into account and changed things. Regards, Thank you, kk -- Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK7FOSS) http://www.kgoetz.id.au No, I won't join your social networking group *** I've changed GPG key to 6C097260 *** -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 Title: CC-by-sa reported as non-free To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vrms/+bug/144006/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
** Changed in: vrms (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed = Opinion -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 Title: CC-by-sa reported as non-free To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vrms/+bug/144006/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
please explain why you think this is opinion ** Changed in: vrms (Ubuntu) Status: Opinion = Confirmed -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 Title: CC-by-sa reported as non-free To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vrms/+bug/144006/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 08:37, KarlGoetz k...@kgoetz.id.au wrote:
please explain why you think this is opinion
Debian opinion != FSF opinion
Furthermore, vrms works by looking at the section of the package to
base its decisions on. If it reports something incorrectly, then there
are two possibilities (which not exclude one from another):
1. there is a bug in vrms
2. there is a bug in the packaging, where an incorrect section of the
package is declared.
--
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFC
http://rb.doesntexist.org/blog : Projects : https://github.com/rbrito/
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006
Title:
CC-by-sa reported as non-free
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vrms/+bug/144006/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:37:20 - Rogério Theodoro de Brito rbr...@ime.usp.br wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 08:37, KarlGoetz k...@kgoetz.id.au wrote: please explain why you think this is opinion Debian opinion != FSF opinion Indeed. And != Ubuntu opinion too. Furthermore, vrms works by looking at the section of the package to base its decisions on. If it reports something incorrectly, then there are two possibilities (which not exclude one from another): 1. there is a bug in vrms 2. there is a bug in the packaging, where an incorrect section of the package is declared. Given this was filed against ubuntu when Gobuntu was being developed, I'm tempted to suggest this bug should be marked 'invalid'. thanks, kk -- Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK7FOSS) http://www.kgoetz.id.au No, I won't join your social networking group *** I've changed GPG key to 6C097260 *** -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 Title: CC-by-sa reported as non-free To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vrms/+bug/144006/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
** Changed in: vrms (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed = Invalid -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 Title: CC-by-sa reported as non-free To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vrms/+bug/144006/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 18:36, KarlGoetz k...@kgoetz.id.au wrote:
Given this was filed against ubuntu when Gobuntu was being developed,
I'm tempted to suggest this bug should be marked 'invalid'.
OK, Took the suggestion into account and changed things.
Regards,
--
Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFC
http://rb.doesntexist.org/blog : Projects : https://github.com/rbrito/
DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006
Title:
CC-by-sa reported as non-free
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vrms/+bug/144006/+subscriptions
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
Changed the incorrectly set status back to confirmed ** Changed in: vrms (Ubuntu) Status: In Progress = Confirmed -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
** Changed in: vrms (Ubuntu) Status: Confirmed = In Progress -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
You've conviced me that cc-by-sa 2.5 is DFSG-nonfree, but the real question is: is ubuntu following DFSG? Back in the days of gobuntu, ubuntu was officially following FSF guidelins rather than the DFSG. And if I understand correctly, cc-by-sa 2.5 is considered free for non-sw work by the FSF (http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/). -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
Some of the information here in the previous comments is old/outdated or incorrect. Here is the real story. According to the DFSG and the FSF, CC-BY-SA = 3.0 is Free. See http://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#CreativeCommonsAttributionShare- Alike.28CC-BY-SA.29v3.0 tangerine-icon-theme is licensed under CC-BY-SA 2.5... which is non- Free. Hence, vrms complains about it. Here's tangerine-icon-theme's COPYRIGHT file: http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/non-free/t /tangerine-icon-theme/tangerine-icon-theme_0.26.debian-3/tangerine-icon- theme.copyright vrms works by parsing /var/lib/dpkg/status. For each package, vrms determines if it is installed, and if it is, it looks at the package's section to see if it's in the non-free section. For example, Here is an excerpt: Package: tangerine-icon-theme Status: install ok installed Priority: optional Section: non-free/x11 vrms sees Section: non-free and reports the package as non-Free. That's it... vrms has not logic to evaluate licenses, it simply uses the section. As for the solution, I think it's a Very Bad Thing that Ubuntu depends on a non-DFSG Free package right out of the box, and it's a serious problem that out to be fixed immediately (either by dropping tangerine- icon-theme from the default install, or changing the license to CC-BY-SA 3.0). -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
Tell me if I've understood correctly: vrms should show me only packages that I've installed from restricted or multiverse? -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
CC-by-sa is considered free for artistic content by the FSF, and the packages listed as non-free by vrms contains icons et similia. The meaning of vrms is indeed Virtual Richard Matthew Stallman, but it lists packages considered non-free by Debian (that's because was written by Debian developers and not by the FSF). -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
Is CC-by-sa non-free? How so? -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/04/msg00031.html -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
CC-by-sa it's free for ubuntu (there was a discussion on the gobuntu-devel mailing list). I know that vrms is a debian project, so that it's impossible for us to send a patch upstream (unless debian itself decide that older CC-by-sa licences are indeed free), but ubuntu can do and apply a patch to the vrms packet without sending it to upstream. It's annoying to use vrms and see a list of debian-non-free packages installed on an ubuntu system: on an ubuntu system I want vrms to list packages considered non-free by ubuntu, not debian. -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
The package is called virtualRichardMStallman, I want it to list packages considered non-free by FSF. -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
What about CC-BY-SA 3.0? Debian does consider 3.0 to be free according to DFSG, but not previous versions. -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
** Changed in: vrms (Ubuntu) Status: New = Confirmed ** Tags added: gobuntu -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
GNU FDL is DFSG free provided the invariant section clauses are not used. Yes, but e.g. autoconf-doc uses the FDL and is still list as non-free; this is because, as long as I know, software from FSF uses the FDL entirely (invariant sections included). -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
GNU FDL is DFSG free provided the invariant section clauses are not used. -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
Re: [Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
I also see autoconf-doc, gdb-doc, manpages-posix, manpages-posix-dev and make-doc between non-free packages, is it right? It sounds strange. Forgive me for the delay, please. Well, vrms is a debian software, so even packages with the GNU FDL are listed as non-free (such as autoconf-doc, for example). In the perspective that the ubuntu freeness policy is (or will be) based on the FSF's one, I think that this package needs a heavy effort for ubuntization. -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
[Bug 144006] Re: CC-by-sa reported as non-free
I also see autoconf-doc, gdb-doc, manpages-posix, manpages-posix-dev and make-doc between non-free packages, is it right? It sounds strange. -- CC-by-sa reported as non-free https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/144006 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is the bug contact for Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
