Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
On 9/5/06, Andreas Barth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Markus Laire ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060830 15:01]: This problem was mentioned in this list on _2004_ but cdrtools still hasn't been removed from Debian (see [2]). IMHO hypocrisy is perfect word to describe such behaviour. This list isn't the place where everybody needs to jump if someone sends a mail. If you want to make sure this issue is taken up, please file an RC bug (what happened in the meantime), if it is an release critical issue. I would prefer to not continue with this, but I need to reply. I've already mentioned in a previous mail, but I would want to present my apologies again for the strong, abrasive, and maybe offending parts of my responses. But there is something I do not understand. Why this list is not the place to put disagreements on the way legal issues are handled? I'm sorry for the strong way of saying things I've used on some of my mails. But, except the offensive wording which was a mistake for my part, I think I should be allowed to disagree, and to publicly expose my point of view, even when my point of view is negative. If this list is not the place, where is it? debian-private? As somebody filed an RC-bug against cdrtools for this reason, we knew that we have to fix that prior to release of etch. I prefer to not enter in the cdrtools issue, because I know almost nothing about this bug. In fact, I was not aware of this license incompatibility until now. My claims are for the bugs that are downgraded, silently ignored or allowed into the stable release because of several exceptions that I do not see. And that is what I would want to say. So, if you think something is an important issue, *you* need to make sure it is actually mentioned in the right places. And please don't cry because people are not jumping to conclusions, but take the proper time to create a proper solution. That is exactly I was trying to perform, searching for license problems, reporting them, and also trying to help to solve them whenever possible. I think that we all agree with this. The problem starts when we disagree on how much important a particular issue is, and a serious problem for myself is not serious for others. Every person has a different point of view, this is perfectly normal. But I think we have an important difference between Debian claims and reality, and I would prefer to have less beautiful claims more close to reality than ideal claims too far from reality. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
* Roberto Gordo Saez ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060909 11:22]: But there is something I do not understand. Why this list is not the place to put disagreements on the way legal issues are handled? There is nothing wrong with discussing legal issues in debian-legal, try to get a common understanding, try to resolve issues etc. However, it isn't guranteed that someone picks up things posted in debian-legal. Debian-legal is a discussion place, not an issue tracker. My claims are for the bugs that are downgraded, silently ignored or allowed into the stable release because of several exceptions that I do not see. And that is what I would want to say. If you think the Debian-project at large is misinterpreting the social contract, I think the right place for this discussion is debian-project. If you think a maintainer does severity deflation of serious bugs, and you cannot get to a common understanding, you should IMHO consider speaking with the maintainer first. The debian-legal list could sometimes be of some assistance, as well as other lists (also of course depending on the kind of bug report), but the final say about whether a bug is release critical or not is in the hands of the release team (and if you don't like their decision, the appropriate way to escalate per constitution is the technical committee). Of course, trying to get the heat level down, and also having a good and helpful reputation are both quite helpful in achiving a good result - our goal should be that bugs are fixed. So often writing a patch for a package is more important than arguing about the severity. I have more than once experienced that maintainers accept patches for bugs they consider of relatively low priority, if one gives them an well-tested patch and explains why it is more important for other users - even if the maintainer doesn't agree it is any real bug at all, he might be willing to fix it. And that is what really counts in the end of the day. That is exactly I was trying to perform, searching for license problems, reporting them, and also trying to help to solve them whenever possible. I think that we all agree with this. The problem starts when we disagree on how much important a particular issue is, and a serious problem for myself is not serious for others. My experience is that one should start with easy issues - because it is far easier to convince people in such cases. Just as an idea, you could e.g. use user tags for such bugs. And then you can follow on such bugs even if the maintainer disagree about priorities. You could even set up some page with sorting by priorities or so and make update mails. But don't expect anyone else to jump up on that. Every person has a different point of view, this is perfectly normal. But I think we have an important difference between Debian claims and reality, and I would prefer to have less beautiful claims more close to reality than ideal claims too far from reality. Actually, Debian makes different claims. And as always in real life, different claims sometimes conflict with each other. That is natural, and we need to make sure we somehow get to the best we could under condition of all these claims. That different people have different priorities is something helpful, and the only thing we need to make sure is that we don't hurt ourselfs in the discussion. None of the goals is a 120%-goal - and to learn that is something not too easy. So I welcome any efforts, as long as we all keep our common goals as common goals, and try to work together towards them. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
* Markus Laire ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [060830 15:01]: I have somewhat similar feelings after I found out that the cdrtools-package[1] included in Debian isn't DFSG-free, but is still included in main. (Even worse, its license might even be illegal because it's GPLv2 + incombatible restrictions) This problem was mentioned in this list on _2004_ but cdrtools still hasn't been removed from Debian (see [2]). IMHO hypocrisy is perfect word to describe such behaviour. This list isn't the place where everybody needs to jump if someone sends a mail. If you want to make sure this issue is taken up, please file an RC bug (what happened in the meantime), if it is an release critical issue. I used to believe that Debian only included legal, DFSG-free software in main, but cdrtools fiasco seems to prove that I was wrong. As somebody filed an RC-bug against cdrtools for this reason, we knew that we have to fix that prior to release of etch. However, I don't think that in an perfect world, we should jump to conclusions. Debian isn't only about free software, but also about our users. So, carefully going forward is IMHO the best we could do, and have done. And, if you look from todays perspective, this issue was resolved. So, if you think something is an important issue, *you* need to make sure it is actually mentioned in the right places. And please don't cry because people are not jumping to conclusions, but take the proper time to create a proper solution. Cheers, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
Markus Laire writes: On 8/30/06, Roberto Gordo Saez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If this is the common feeling here, I think I made a serious mistake choosing Debian, because it does not follow my definition of freedom. I would like to urge to change the Social Contract to be clarified this in this case. I'm serious about that, it is no joke, because I feel mislead. When reading it I was thinking I was doing the correct. I was not sending those bugs because I am bad person, I was actually thinking that was the common feeling and the correct think to do. Currently, under my point of view, the Social Contract and guidelines do not reflect reality, they are just hypocrisy. This is a subjective view, I know, but I think I'm not the only person in the world who may understand it this way, so please, clarify. You are not the only one. I have somewhat similar feelings after I found out that the cdrtools-package[1] included in Debian isn't DFSG-free, but is still included in main. (Even worse, its license might even be illegal because it's GPLv2 + incombatible restrictions) This problem was mentioned in this list on _2004_ but cdrtools still hasn't been removed from Debian (see [2]). IMHO hypocrisy is perfect word to describe such behaviour. I used to believe that Debian only included legal, DFSG-free software in main, but cdrtools fiasco seems to prove that I was wrong. Ever since the issue in cdrtools was found, the Debian maintainers have been trying to convince the awkward upstream developer to fix his licensing. These things take time. In the end, those same maintainers have given up on that as a lost cause and instead have started work on a free cdrtools fork that will ship in etch instead of cdrtools. Please don't start throwing around insulting terms like hypocrisy - they're not going to gain you any friends, nor are they going to encourage people to devote their valuable time to Free Software projects. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.[EMAIL PROTECTED] I suspect most samba developers are already technically insane... Of course, since many of them are Australians, you can't tell. -- Linus Torvalds -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
On 8/31/06, Steve McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Markus Laire writes: I have somewhat similar feelings after I found out that the cdrtools-package[1] included in Debian isn't DFSG-free, but is still included in main. (Even worse, its license might even be illegal because it's GPLv2 + incombatible restrictions) I should've added 'IMHO' to that sentence. I didn't check if this opinion is/was shared by others. This problem was mentioned in this list on _2004_ but cdrtools still hasn't been removed from Debian (see [2]). IMHO hypocrisy is perfect word to describe such behaviour. I used to believe that Debian only included legal, DFSG-free software in main, but cdrtools fiasco seems to prove that I was wrong. Ever since the issue in cdrtools was found, the Debian maintainers have been trying to convince the awkward upstream developer to fix his licensing. These things take time. So they've been doing this for 2 years, and have included non-DFSG-free cdrtools in main while doing so? They even shipped Sarge with this known non-DFSG-free package in main? IMHO cdrtools should've been removed from main while this process was underway. In the end, those same maintainers have given up on that as a lost cause and instead have started work on a free cdrtools fork that will ship in etch instead of cdrtools. Do you have any link/source to support the claim that this will be fixed for etch? I havn't found any such information. Is there a public source-code-repository for this fork? (I know that forking was mentioned at [1] but I havn't seen anything more substantial) [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=377109 Please don't start throwing around insulting terms like hypocrisy - they're not going to gain you any friends, nor are they going to encourage people to devote their valuable time to Free Software projects. If my comments about hypocrisy are true, then I don't care about friends whom I might lost because of speaking the truth. Then it would also be appropriate for people to be discouraged from devoting their valuable time to hypocritical Free Software projects. If I was wrong, then I can only apologize and try to be more carefull in the future. ps. I wasn't aware that cdrtools has been requested to be removed because there was no mention of it at cdrtools-bugs[2] and I didn't know to check the cdrtools-overview[3]. [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?src=cdrtools [3] http://packages.qa.debian.org/c/cdrtools.html -- Markus Laire -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
Markus Laire writes: On 8/31/06, Steve McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the end, those same maintainers have given up on that as a lost cause and instead have started work on a free cdrtools fork that will ship in etch instead of cdrtools. Do you have any link/source to support the claim that this will be fixed for etch? I havn't found any such information. Is there a public source-code-repository for this fork? svn://svn://svn.debian.org/debburn/nonameyet/ The maintainers (particularly Eduard Bloch) have been working hard on this for the last couple of weeks, and we're hoping the result should hit unstable in the next week. (I know that forking was mentioned at [1] but I havn't seen anything more substantial) [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=377109 Please don't start throwing around insulting terms like hypocrisy - they're not going to gain you any friends, nor are they going to encourage people to devote their valuable time to Free Software projects. If my comments about hypocrisy are true, then I don't care about friends whom I might lost because of speaking the truth. Then it would also be appropriate for people to be discouraged from devoting their valuable time to hypocritical Free Software projects. If I was wrong, then I can only apologize and try to be more carefull in the future. Then I'd suggest you do *exactly* that. Speaking for myself, I can definitely say that being publically abused *while in the middle of fixing these issues* does bad things for motivation. What have *you* done to help, apart from claiming we're hypocritical? -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.[EMAIL PROTECTED] I suspect most samba developers are already technically insane... Of course, since many of them are Australians, you can't tell. -- Linus Torvalds -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
This one time, at band camp, Markus Laire said: On 8/31/06, Steve McIntyre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Markus Laire writes: I used to believe that Debian only included legal, DFSG-free software in main, but cdrtools fiasco seems to prove that I was wrong. Ever since the issue in cdrtools was found, the Debian maintainers have been trying to convince the awkward upstream developer to fix his licensing. These things take time. So they've been doing this for 2 years, and have included non-DFSG-free cdrtools in main while doing so? They even shipped Sarge with this known non-DFSG-free package in main? IMHO cdrtools should've been removed from main while this process was underway. Feel free to do some work on the problem, instead of just insulting people and grandstanding. In the end, those same maintainers have given up on that as a lost cause and instead have started work on a free cdrtools fork that will ship in etch instead of cdrtools. Do you have any link/source to support the claim that this will be fixed for etch? I havn't found any such information. Is there a public source-code-repository for this fork? Have you looked? It's been announced in several places. Please don't start throwing around insulting terms like hypocrisy - they're not going to gain you any friends, nor are they going to encourage people to devote their valuable time to Free Software projects. If my comments about hypocrisy are true, then I don't care about friends whom I might lost because of speaking the truth. Then it would also be appropriate for people to be discouraged from devoting their valuable time to hypocritical Free Software projects. If I was wrong, then I can only apologize and try to be more carefull in the future. First, I guess you owe Steve and Eduard apologies. Second, it's not particularly helpful to tell people that are actually working on a problem that they are hypocritical or just 'claiming' to work on something. If you feel that this is a problem, get involved and work on it, instead of slinging mud at people. -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
On 8/31/06, Stephen Gran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This one time, at band camp, Markus Laire said: So they've been doing this for 2 years, and have included non-DFSG-free cdrtools in main while doing so? They even shipped Sarge with this known non-DFSG-free package in main? IMHO cdrtools should've been removed from main while this process was underway. Feel free to do some work on the problem, instead of just insulting people and grandstanding. I shortly considered that, but I don't know enough of cd-burning to be able to fork such a project. Now that someone else has done the forking, I might be able to help. Do you have any link/source to support the claim that this will be fixed for etch? I havn't found any such information. Is there a public source-code-repository for this fork? Have you looked? It's been announced in several places. I'm following few mailing-lists and bug #377109. Where I should've looked? In bug #377109 it was said that A good free replacement is needed, but that clearly won't hit etch... and in another message Yeah. Im waiting until we have the free fork replacement ready (slowly working on it), cdrtools will go out when that goes in. But since I read from some other place (don't remember where) that there has been several tries to fork cdrtools and none have succeeded, I wasn't sure how real that slowly working on it comment was. Also it seemed clear from those comments that Etch was clearly out of the question. Please don't start throwing around insulting terms like hypocrisy - they're not going to gain you any friends, nor are they going to encourage people to devote their valuable time to Free Software projects. If my comments about hypocrisy are true, then I don't care about friends whom I might lost because of speaking the truth. Then it would also be appropriate for people to be discouraged from devoting their valuable time to hypocritical Free Software projects. If I was wrong, then I can only apologize and try to be more carefull in the future. First, I guess you owe Steve and Eduard apologies. Yes, I apologize. It seems I was wrong in this case and this is being worked on. Second, it's not particularly helpful to tell people that are actually working on a problem that they are hypocritical or just 'claiming' to work on something. If you feel that this is a problem, get involved and work on it, instead of slinging mud at people. I wasn't aware of anything but a single claim on bug #377109 comments. As I said above, I don't think I'd be able to fork such a project, so I was unsure about what I could do, if anything. -- Markus Laire -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
On 8/30/06, Roberto Gordo Saez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If this is the common feeling here, I think I made a serious mistake choosing Debian, because it does not follow my definition of freedom. I would like to urge to change the Social Contract to be clarified this in this case. I'm serious about that, it is no joke, because I feel mislead. When reading it I was thinking I was doing the correct. I was not sending those bugs because I am bad person, I was actually thinking that was the common feeling and the correct think to do. Currently, under my point of view, the Social Contract and guidelines do not reflect reality, they are just hypocrisy. This is a subjective view, I know, but I think I'm not the only person in the world who may understand it this way, so please, clarify. You are not the only one. I have somewhat similar feelings after I found out that the cdrtools-package[1] included in Debian isn't DFSG-free, but is still included in main. (Even worse, its license might even be illegal because it's GPLv2 + incombatible restrictions) This problem was mentioned in this list on _2004_ but cdrtools still hasn't been removed from Debian (see [2]). IMHO hypocrisy is perfect word to describe such behaviour. I used to believe that Debian only included legal, DFSG-free software in main, but cdrtools fiasco seems to prove that I was wrong. A recent message[3] from DPL only made this worse as it's titled Bits from the DPL: Freedom and etch and starts with As a project, Debian is heavily committed to the ideals of free software. That's not news to anyone reading this, ... In the light of the cdrtools-fiasco that is clearly not true. And in case your way of think is not the common feeling, please make a poll or something. Until this is completely clear, I won't be morally happy using nor giving my time to the Debian project, so you won't be bothered with those bugs again. [1] http://packages.debian.org/testing/source/cdrtools [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/03/msg00415.html [3] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/08/msg00015.html DISCLAIMER: IANAL, IANADD -- Markus Laire -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Hypocrisy of Debian (was: Sorry, no more RC bugs for non-free data in main ...)
Markus Laire wrote: On 8/30/06, Roberto Gordo Saez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If this is the common feeling here, I think I made a serious mistake choosing Debian, because it does not follow my definition of freedom. I would like to urge to change the Social Contract to be clarified this in this case. I'm serious about that, it is no joke, because I feel mislead. When reading it I was thinking I was doing the correct. I was not sending those bugs because I am bad person, I was actually thinking that was the common feeling and the correct think to do. Currently, under my point of view, the Social Contract and guidelines do not reflect reality, they are just hypocrisy. This is a subjective view, I know, but I think I'm not the only person in the world who may understand it this way, so please, clarify. You are not the only one. I have somewhat similar feelings after I found out that the cdrtools-package[1] included in Debian isn't DFSG-free, but is still included in main. (Even worse, its license might even be illegal because it's GPLv2 + incombatible restrictions) This problem was mentioned in this list on _2004_ but cdrtools still hasn't been removed from Debian (see [2]). IMHO hypocrisy is perfect word to describe such behaviour. I have been working on stuff like this... and I suspect I used the word hypocrisy back in 2004 or earlier, when the Invariant Sections of the GFDL came to light (AJ Towns took the geniunely bizarre view that they were non-free but should be allowed in 'main' for sarge without amending the Social Contract). :-) You would be shocked at when the kernel 'BLOBs' were discovered -- it's even earlier. I used to believe that Debian only included legal, DFSG-free software in main, but cdrtools fiasco seems to prove that I was wrong. You've been proved wrong long ago. Luckily, I really think that there are relatively few contaminated packages (they just happen to be relatively high-profile, important ones). There are probably more where upstream has messed up its licensing but will be happy to fix it. One good thing: the cdrtools maintainers have requested that it be removed. Work is ongoing to get decent replacements. This *will* be fixed. -- Nathanael Nerode [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bush admitted to violating FISA and said he was proud of it. So why isn't he in prison yet?... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
