Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-23 Thread Wichert Akkerman
(I'm coming in late here, but I'll make some remarks anyway. If others made them as well just ignore me). A couple of remarks: * we don't control how mirrors mirror our archives, and we don't want to create a situation where mirrors need special tools and/or scripts. (okay, we probably could

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-23 Thread Jonathan Walther
On Sun, 23 May 1999, Wichert Akkerman wrote: A couple of remarks: * we don't control how mirrors mirror our archives, and we don't want to create a situation where mirrors need special tools and/or scripts. According to previous posts, our top tier mirrors already run special software to

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-22 Thread Richard Stallman
e.g. if i hear of a cool idea for a new and/or improved gadget, i can build one myself and use it whenever i like. In the US, you can be sued for patent infringement for doing that. I am not certain that it is so in all countries. Do you know with certainty that some countries make an

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-22 Thread Patrik Nordebo
On Sat, May 22, 1999 at 03:09:43AM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: e.g. if i hear of a cool idea for a new and/or improved gadget, i can build one myself and use it whenever i like. In the US, you can be sued for patent infringement for doing that. I am not certain that it is so in

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-21 Thread Jim Freeman
On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 10:53:19AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 07:51:31PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: Also, I am not sure it is useful to distinguish between use-restricted and patent-restricted, given that the consequences would be the same. the reason i

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-20 Thread Richard Stallman
As a practical matter, I don't think any countries restrict importation of software that might be in Debian, unless they also restrict its use. The only such circumstances I can think of have to do with pornography; in the UK, for example, customs will seize things that are on sale openly in

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-20 Thread Craig Sanders
On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 07:51:31PM -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: Also, I am not sure it is useful to distinguish between use-restricted and patent-restricted, given that the consequences would be the same. the reason i suggested having a patent-restriced category is that patents don't

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-19 Thread Jonathan Walther
On Tue, 18 May 1999, Joey Hess wrote: Well, we've established that no site in the US will carry the crypto stuff. So what if I'm in the US and want to get non-US stuff? Since non-us has disappeared into the distribution, I can't add a line to apt pointing to non-us. So what am I supposed to

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-19 Thread Craig Sanders
On Mon, May 17, 1999 at 12:40:44AM -0700, Jonathan Walther wrote: Package: ssh Export-Restricted: United States Import-Restricted: Russia, France i haven't had time to read or think about your entire proposal yet, but my initial reaction to this is that using country names is wrong, it should

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-19 Thread Jonathan Walther
Debian is about freedom, specifically freedom of software. Being seen as examplary citizens can only help our cause. We have a sterling reputation for high standards. I agree with you on using the two letter iso country codes. However, I don't see a need for the extra fields Use-Restricted

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-19 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Tue, May 18, 1999 at 12:20:35PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: Perhaps a better goal (although significantly more difficult) would be to design a system where we can have multiple symmetric masters, where you can upload to any of them, and the propagate packages amongst themselves. The

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-19 Thread Richard Kaszeta
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho writes (Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution): On Tue, May 18, 1999 at 12:20:35PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: Perhaps a better goal (although significantly more difficult) would be to design a system where we can have multiple symmetric masters, where you can upload to any

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-19 Thread Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho
On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 08:26:21AM -0500, Richard Kaszeta wrote: Note that CTAN recently has split their archive into main and non-free trees based upon licenses like we do. :) Yes, I've noticed it. What criteria do they use? The DFSG? The OSD? A YAFSG (yet another free software guideline)?

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-18 Thread Joey Hess
Jonathan Walther wrote: Thus, server foo in France will not download the ssh package, but if the maintainer of ssh always uploads to the Incoming on a canada.debian.org, all mirrors that are allowed to will hit every server in the master.list that might have the package until it finds the one

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-18 Thread Jonathan Walther
On Mon, 17 May 1999, Joey Hess wrote: Well what do you do about a mirror in the US that can import software but cannot export it? You either have to somehow validate all downloads of that software from the mirror are from people in the US, or you leave the mirror open to downloads from

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-18 Thread Joey Hess
Jonathan Walther wrote: I would think that if a mirror couldn't export a peice of software, it just wouldn't host it. The logistics of figuring out which country every IP is in are... daunting, to say the least. Well then your proposal doesn't do away with the non-us division. Every county

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-18 Thread Jonathan Walther
How do you figure Joey? Some countries will let us distribute patented stuff... other countries will let us distribute crypto stuff... The scheme proposed does do away with non-US, by making its original functionality so fine-grained that it disappears into the rest of the distribution. Or am I

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-18 Thread Richard Stallman
Package: ssh Export-Restricted: United States Import-Restricted: Russia, France ssh is a bad example, since it is non-free software everywhere in the world. It is restricted by its developers. Version 2 is even more restricted than version 1. However, the general idea seems like a

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-18 Thread Philip Hands
Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How do you figure Joey? Some countries will let us distribute patented stuff... other countries will let us distribute crypto stuff... The scheme proposed does do away with non-US, by making its original functionality so fine-grained that it

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-18 Thread Jonathan Walther
On 18 May 1999, Philip Hands wrote: Perhaps a better goal (although significantly more difficult) would be to design a system where we can have multiple symmetric masters, where you can upload to any of them, and the propagate packages amongst themselves. Perhaps I didn't explain it clearly

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-18 Thread Joey Hess
Jonathan Walther wrote: How do you figure Joey? Some countries will let us distribute patented stuff... other countries will let us distribute crypto stuff... The scheme proposed does do away with non-US, by making its original functionality so fine-grained that it disappears into the rest

(LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-17 Thread Jonathan Walther
We are here to make software free. We can make it free, or we can drive thorns into our flesh trying to change the minds of uncaring governments. Our current situation with the non-US section of our distribution is akin to a form of fruitless martyrdom. Its painful to us, but doesn't really

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-17 Thread Richard Braakman
Jonathan Walther wrote: Mirroring Software: --- Im not sure what software is currently used for synchronizing mirrors, however, it will need to take the above policies into account. Hopefully our additions to the policy will make it so much easier to stay legal and avoid

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-17 Thread Ben Bell
On Mon, May 17, 1999 at 12:41:04AM -0700, Jonathan Walther wrote: For example, Package: ssh Export-Restricted: United States Import-Restricted: Russia, France Can I suggest that we use ISO country codes instead? The user can do a `touch /etc/LEGAL` to make apt respect Import-Restricted. It

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-17 Thread Craig Brozefsky
Richard Braakman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jonathan Walther wrote: Mirroring Software: --- Im not sure what software is currently used for synchronizing mirrors, however, it will need to take the above policies into account. Hopefully our additions to the policy will

Re: (LONG) Correct non-US solution

1999-05-17 Thread Manoj Srivastava
Hi, Jonathan == Jonathan Walther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jonathan Changes to a packages control file: Jonathan -- Two new fields are added Jonathan to the control file, Import-Restricted and Jonathan Export-Restricted. These fields take a comma delimited