Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
2011/6/22 Jesús Corrius je...@softcatala.org: I checked those files as well. They are all 'noarch' (do not contain compiled programs; No Architecture), and contain the same .png branding images. The license not only covers the code, also the images. So if those images are in the program, the source code must include them. That's why the link to the source code has to point to them too, that is, it must point to the modified source code of your distribution. And not the original at LibreOffice's. Or point to both ;) Two points: 1. When you reply to an e-mail, it is important to keep the lines which say On Friday 22 June 2011, XYZ x...@gmail.com said: In this way, it is easy to see who said the quoted text. 2. As I said earlier, a user can get LibreOffice from the LibreOffice website, or get it packaged from some other source (such as a Linux distribution). It is the problem of that other source to explain to the user where to get any modifications/additions. We can say somewhere in the About dialog box something along the lines: You can get the source code for this version of LibreOffice by following the instructions at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/. Please note that if you received LibreOffice from a distributor other than www.libreoffice.org, there might exist additional modifications; consult that distributor for more details. If the distributor is really into making significant changes in their LibreOffice, they can modify the above message and add specific instructions that relate to them. It is quite easy to do so; for Debian/Ubuntu, you can write apt-get source libreoffice However, this is an issue that Debian/Ubuntu and any other distribution have to deal with. Actually, a user of a Linux distribution is supposed to know already that for each package they can use these 'apt-get source xyz' commands to get the source code. Simos -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 01:18:34 +0200 Jesús Corrius je...@softcatala.org wrote: 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a specific Wiki page, for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real* source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can download from the LibO website, hence the information will be misleading. In this case the distributions could modifiy the about box as well and change the link accordingly... Or just add an additional link to their specific version. We provide all the required source tarballs for each version and every piece of code is in our git repository. So we fulfill all the requirements but we have the problem that it's not easy to find. I guess writing a good text about how to get the source code for every version and place it in our download page (or a link to the wiki page) is good enough. Should be sufficient as well. Manfred -- Manfred Usselmann usselman...@icg-online.de -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
Manfred Usselmann wrote: I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real* source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can download from the LibO website, hence the information will be misleading. In this case the distributions could modifiy the about box as well and change the link accordingly... Or just add an additional link to their specific version. I see little point in burdening distros with writing specific instructions into tons of about boxes of their software, when there are well-known distro methods to get the source (pkg-manager install pkgname-src). Especially since all of that needs to be translated into ~100 languages. We provide all the required source tarballs for each version and every piece of code is in our git repository. So we fulfill all the requirements but we have the problem that it's not easy to find. I guess writing a good text about how to get the source code for every version and place it in our download page (or a link to the wiki page) is good enough. Should be sufficient as well. Sure, let's link to some build howto also from the download page - but I consider this discussion somewhat moot, since anyone wanting to modify and/or compile LibreOffice code (which is the whole spirit behind copyleft) will surely visit the Get Involved or Developers subpages (that are very prominently visible on the libreoffice site). And that has all the info. In closing, when a version is retired (3.3.2 is superseded by 3.3.3), both src and binary gets moved to http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/ So nothing is lost. :) Cheers, -- Thorsten -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
2011/6/21 Jesús Corrius je...@softcatala.org: 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a specific Wiki page, for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real* source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can download from the LibO website, hence the information will be misleading. As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add packaging instructions. If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive LibreOffice development and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us who they are. I would not see this as a show stopper; we can just append something like If you did not receive LibreOffice from http://www.libreoffice.org/, there might exist extra changes to the source code. Consult the distributor that gave you the LibreOffice installation packages for more details. We provide all the required source tarballs for each version and every piece of code is in our git repository. So we fulfill all the requirements but we have the problem that it's not easy to find. I guess writing a good text about how to get the source code for every version and place it in our download page (or a link to the wiki page) is good enough. So, everyone agrees that in any case we should write a nice wiki page that explains the merits of the copyleft LibreOffice? That is, a Wiki page that explains in simple terms how to benefit from the source code. Stage 1 would be to simply visit http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/ and select the version they have. For LibreOffice 3.3.2 and the Writer module, it's http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/writer/tree/?h=libreoffice-3-3-2 From there, you can view the files online. Stage 2 would be to clone the source code repositories. The compressed repositories are about 1.2GB, and with the working copies they should reach about 2GB. Then, with git commands it is possible to switch to any branch/version of LibreOffice (such as 3.3.2). Using Git source code tools, it is easy to view changes. For example, see http://trac.novowork.com/gitg/wiki/Screenshots Stage 3 would be to compile the whole lot and produce a new version of LibreOffice. Stage 4 would be to make an elemental change in LibreOffice (such as modify slightly the About dialog box), compile, and view the change in the newly produced LibreOffice. I think that such a document will empower the end-users, and make them appreciate the fact that LibreOffice is copyleft. Simos -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis: 2011/6/21 Jesús Corriusje...@softcatala.org: 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a specific Wiki page, for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real* source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can download from the LibO website, hence the information will be misleading. As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add packaging instructions. If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive LibreOffice development and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us who they are. At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing extensive 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time. Example: http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpmquery=libreoffice-branding Regards, Sveinn í Felli -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Sveinn í Felli svei...@nett.is wrote: Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis: 2011/6/21 Jesús Corriusje...@softcatala.org: 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a specific Wiki page, for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real* source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can download from the LibO website, hence the information will be misleading. As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add packaging instructions. If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive LibreOffice development and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us who they are. At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing extensive 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time. Example: http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpmquery=libreoffice-branding I opened the file (file-roller can open .rpm files) and I only saw some OpenSUSE branding icons and a small rc file. There was no code in there, and the file is a 'noarch' one (No Architecture). Perhaps you are referring to a different file? Simos -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
Þann þri 21.jún 2011 12:11, skrifaði Sveinn í Felli: Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis: 2011/6/21 Jesús Corriusje...@softcatala.org: 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a specific Wiki page, for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real* source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can download from the LibO website, hence the information will be misleading. As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add packaging instructions. If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive LibreOffice development and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us who they are. At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing extensive 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time. Example: http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpmquery=libreoffice-branding Regards, Sveinn í Felli Better link here: http://software.opensuse.org/search?q=libreoffice-brandingbaseproject=openSUSE%3A11.4lang=enexclude_debug=true Regards, Sveinn -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
Þann þri 21.jún 2011 12:46, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis: On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Sveinn í Fellisvei...@nett.is wrote: Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis: 2011/6/21 Jesús Corriusje...@softcatala.org: 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a specific Wiki page, for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real* source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can download from the LibO website, hence the information will be misleading. As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add packaging instructions. If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive LibreOffice development and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us who they are. At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing extensive 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time. Example: http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpmquery=libreoffice-branding I opened the file (file-roller can open .rpm files) and I only saw some OpenSUSE branding icons and a small rc file. There was no code in there, and the file is a 'noarch' one (No Architecture). Perhaps you are referring to a different file? Simos Better link here: http://software.opensuse.org/search?q=libreoffice-brandingbaseproject=openSUSE%3A11.4lang=enexclude_debug=true BTW, there may be other packages as well. regards, Sveinn -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Sveinn í Felli svei...@nett.is wrote: Þann þri 21.jún 2011 12:46, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis: On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Sveinn í Fellisvei...@nett.is wrote: Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis: 2011/6/21 Jesús Corriusje...@softcatala.org: 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a specific Wiki page, for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real* source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can download from the LibO website, hence the information will be misleading. As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add packaging instructions. If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive LibreOffice development and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us who they are. At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing extensive 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time. Example: http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpmquery=libreoffice-branding I opened the file (file-roller can open .rpm files) and I only saw some OpenSUSE branding icons and a small rc file. There was no code in there, and the file is a 'noarch' one (No Architecture). Perhaps you are referring to a different file? Simos Better link here: http://software.opensuse.org/search?q=libreoffice-brandingbaseproject=openSUSE%3A11.4lang=enexclude_debug=true BTW, there may be other packages as well. I checked those files as well. They are all 'noarch' (do not contain compiled programs; No Architecture), and contain the same .png branding images. Simos -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
I checked those files as well. They are all 'noarch' (do not contain compiled programs; No Architecture), and contain the same .png branding images. The license not only covers the code, also the images. So if those images are in the program, the source code must include them. That's why the link to the source code has to point to them too, that is, it must point to the modified source code of your distribution. And not the original at LibreOffice's. Or point to both ;) -- Jesús Corrius je...@softcatala.org Document Foundation founding member Mobile: +34 661 11 38 26 Skype: jcorrius | Twitter: @jcorrius -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
On 2011-06-18 5:39 AM, Simos Xenitellis wrote: And there is no better way to do this than have the 'git repositories' of the LibreOffice source code. You were correct earlier - he is merely pointing out that nowhere in the license agreement (I haven't read it so am not making the same claim) does it say where or how to GET ACCESS TO the source code. If this is true, it should be rectified immediately. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
Dennis, Tanstaafl, I take your point. Users that have 3.3.2 installed can only get the code for 3.3.3 from the website. As discussed above, I think this meets the spirit of the license but not the specific letter. Simon's idea about downloading the repo at the 3.3.2 marker is a great one, but there is no path to that on either website or wiki. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Availability-of-source-code-Was-Re-OFF-TOPIC-about-GPL-enforcement-Was-Re-tdf-discuss-Re-Libreoffice-tp3078442p3087960.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:22 PM, John LeMoyne Castle lemoyne.cas...@gmail.com wrote: Dennis, Tanstaafl, I take your point. Users that have 3.3.2 installed can only get the code for 3.3.3 from the website. As discussed above, I think this meets the spirit of the license but not the specific letter. Simon's idea about downloading the repo at the 3.3.2 marker is a great one, but there is no path to that on either website or wiki. Let's do it then! 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a specific Wiki page, for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode 2. We create the web page which talks about the git repositories, links to the pages about cloning and checking out branches such as libreoffice 3.3.2. 3. We write a patch for LibreOffice to add the special text and test it. 4. We submit a bug report to have the feature added to the next version of LibreOffice. I can help with items 2, 3 and 4. I need help however as to a. where exactly in the About box (or in the Help menu) shall we put the short paragraph Take screenshots and show on them where to add the text. Put those screenshots on www.imgur.com, send the URL here so we can view them. b. what shall the text say. Propose something that will be helpful for someone who genuinely wants to learn and use the LibreOffice source code. Simos -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a specific Wiki page, for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real* source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can download from the LibO website, hence the information will be misleading. We provide all the required source tarballs for each version and every piece of code is in our git repository. So we fulfill all the requirements but we have the problem that it's not easy to find. I guess writing a good text about how to get the source code for every version and place it in our download page (or a link to the wiki page) is good enough. -- Jesús Corrius je...@softcatala.org Document Foundation founding member Mobile: +34 661 11 38 26 Skype: jcorrius | Twitter: @jcorrius -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
On 18/06/2011 09:39, Simos Xenitellis wrote: The spirit does go well beyond the letter. Ideally, the 'git repositories' should be what everyone gets, rather than a source code snapshot that has no source change history. A couple of years ago I sent a question to FSF about meeting source code requirements for GPLG programs. Specifically, I asked if substituting the entire current code repository was acceptable, rather than a tarball of the specific code that was (supposedly) used. Their response was that the repository was acceptable. They also suggested that a ReadMe file that contained the instructions on pulling the code that the program used be included on the DVD. jonathon -- If Bing copied Google, there wouldn't be anything new worth requesting. If Bing did not copy Google, there wouldn't be anything relevant worth requesting. DaveJakeman 20110207 Groklaw. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
-Original Message- From: Simos Xenitellis [mailto:simos.li...@googlemail.com] Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 17:44 To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice)) On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I didn't say I didn't know how to do it. I didn't say I wanted to build it. This is about honoring the spirit of the free software promise. It is not even about building the code. People may want to do any number of things with the source code (inspect for bugs, for example). To honour the spirit of the free software promise, it should be more than adequate to grab the git repositories. Ask me if you want more details for this. To honour the letter of the free software promise, then you do need those 3.3.2 tarballs. A quick look at the TDF download website shows that it currently covers the latest versions (due to space?), 3.3.3 for the 3.3 line, and 3.4.0 for the 3.4 line. Digging a bit deeper shows this http://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/tdf/libreoffice/box/3.3.2/LibO_3.3.2-2_DVD_allplatforms_de.iso 2.8GB DVD ISO which I believe has the source code. People who actually want to do things with the source code would need to use the git repositories, as it shows the changes between different versions. You can also view online your 3.3.2 branch at http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 4:16 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I consider the spirit to always go beyond the letter. The spirit does go well beyond the letter. The spirit of the free software promise wants to enable you to actually work on the source code, compile it, make your private enhancements and possibly submit those modifications back to the community. And there is no better way to do this than have the 'git repositories' of the LibreOffice source code. Ideally, the 'git repositories' should be what everyone gets, rather than a source code snapshot that has no source change history. Admittedly, the 'git repositories' are about 1.2GB, but once you have a local copy, you can use frequently 'git pull' to update them with any upstream changes. Do you want to switch the repository view to the 3.3.2 version? Simply run the command git checkout --track origin/libreoffice-3-3-2 Having a source code snapshot (tarball) is probably not much useful compared to what you get with using the repositories, http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build Simos -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
Simos Xenitellis wrote: On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Ignoring the repetition on who is entitled to source code and how they are told about it, I would like to know the answers to some very specific, tangible matters closer to home. My question is basically whether the terms of a GPL license attached to a software distribution are applicable to that software distribution, not just downstream derivatives of it. I assume the answer is yes. - Dennis WHY I ASK I have a copy of LibreOffice 3.3.2 installed on my computer. I am looking for any place that I am offered access to the specific (or, indeed, any) source code for the LibreOffice 3.3.2 distribution that I have installed (en-win-x86). Admittedly, I never checked the UI text as to where you can get the source code. To build LibreOffice, I would simply follow the instructions at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build which cover different operating systems. By following the instructions, you create a local repository of the source code, and this repository has *all* versions of LibreOffice (such as 3.3.2 and 3.4.0) and you can select which to build. It should take you a few hours of downloading + compilation to create your own LibreOffice. If you have a fast Internet speed and a good computer, it should take you about 3 hours of compilation. Your question is actually about whether we can make the Help→License information more informative so that users who would like to build LibreOffice, will get directed to the How_to_build page. I had no trouble finding and downloading source code, it is posted right there on the download site. Actually I downloaded it purely for curiosity, I am not qualified to write code in C++ , but I looked at it using Notepad. In that form, it is basically just gibberish, perhaps you have to have a copy of the C++ programming language on your computer in order to see it in an intelligible form, but at least I know that I succeeded in getting the source of part of the Writer module. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Ignoring the repetition on who is entitled to source code and how they are told about it, I would like to know the answers to some very specific, tangible matters closer to home. My question is basically whether the terms of a GPL license attached to a software distribution are applicable to that software distribution, not just downstream derivatives of it. I assume the answer is yes. - Dennis WHY I ASK I have a copy of LibreOffice 3.3.2 installed on my computer. I am looking for any place that I am offered access to the specific (or, indeed, any) source code for the LibreOffice 3.3.2 distribution that I have installed (en-win-x86). Admittedly, I never checked the UI text as to where you can get the source code. To build LibreOffice, I would simply follow the instructions at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build which cover different operating systems. By following the instructions, you create a local repository of the source code, and this repository has *all* versions of LibreOffice (such as 3.3.2 and 3.4.0) and you can select which to build. It should take you a few hours of downloading + compilation to create your own LibreOffice. If you have a fast Internet speed and a good computer, it should take you about 3 hours of compilation. Your question is actually about whether we can make the Help→License information more informative so that users who would like to build LibreOffice, will get directed to the How_to_build page. Looking at the Help | License Information ... tells me about licenses and where to find them, but nothing about source code. If I give this to my friends, none of them will see anything about source code either. If I examine the license, I see that LGPL3 incorporates terms of the GPL3 by reference, and license follows immediately thereafter. The LGPL3 has definitions about source code and it being conveyed. The GPL3 has the details. The preface to the GPL sys that Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs, and that you know you can do these things. Section 6, which applies to the non-source form of the LibreOffice 3.3.2 that I installed specifies a number of ways that source code is still to be made available. 6(d) seems applicable to the way I obtained LibreOffice 3.3.2 by download: d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. ... SO WHERE IS IT? I know of no offer conveyed with the code. If I go back to the site, all I see are 3.3.3 Final and 3.4.0 Final. I see nothing that would allow me to re-retrieve or find the source of the 3.3.2 that I have in my possession. If I follow the Download the source code to build your own installer (why does that have to be the reason?), I see a set of logs that tell me nothing. Under 3.4.1.1, 3.4.0.2, and 3.3.3.1 I see lists of 20-21 tar.bz2's. Well, maybe that qualifies. Maybe not. But what about for my 3.3.2? Indeed, the 3.3.2 version is not showing, because there are newer versions (3.4.1, 3.4.0 and 3.3.3) and the 3.3.2 does not fit to be in that page. You can get 3.3.2 files at http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/ http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/src/ As I said earlier, if you really want to compile, you would go for the 'git repositories' and the instructions at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build AND ABOUT THOSE DEPENDENCIES If any of the listed dependencies also have derivatives used, is there some place where, ahem, those modified sources are available in some suitable way? See the dependencies at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build#Dependencies Simos -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
RE: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
I didn't say I didn't know how to do it. I didn't say I wanted to build it. This is about honoring the spirit of the free software promise. It is not even about building the code. People may want to do any number of things with the source code (inspect for bugs, for example). I *did* say I don't see where the distro tells me how to find it and I don't see where the download page lets me find it in the same way (and now I can't even find the version that I am running). 20-21 tar.bz's are also rather intimidating, but way better than nothing. So, where is the link on the web site that would let me find the version I am running and the source code for it? (The same question for dependency derivatives is a bonus question.) - Dennis -Original Message- From: Simos Xenitellis [mailto:simos.li...@googlemail.com] Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 16:31 To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice)) On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: [ ... ] I have a copy of LibreOffice 3.3.2 installed on my computer. I am looking for any place that I am offered access to the specific (or, indeed, any) source code for the LibreOffice 3.3.2 distribution that I have installed (en-win-x86). Admittedly, I never checked the UI text as to where you can get the source code. To build LibreOffice, I would simply follow the instructions at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build which cover different operating systems. [ ... ] Your question is actually about whether we can make the Help→License information more informative so that users who would like to build LibreOffice, will get directed to the How_to_build page. [ ... ] If I follow the Download the source code to build your own installer (why does that have to be the reason?), I see a set of logs that tell me nothing. Under 3.4.1.1, 3.4.0.2, and 3.3.3.1 I see lists of 20-21 tar.bz2's. Well, maybe that qualifies. Maybe not. But what about for my 3.3.2? Indeed, the 3.3.2 version is not showing, because there are newer versions (3.4.1, 3.4.0 and 3.3.3) and the 3.3.2 does not fit to be in that page. You can get 3.3.2 files at http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/ http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/src/ As I said earlier, if you really want to compile, you would go for the 'git repositories' and the instructions at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build AND ABOUT THOSE DEPENDENCIES If any of the listed dependencies also have derivatives used, is there some place where, ahem, those modified sources are available in some suitable way? See the dependencies at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build#Dependencies Simos -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I didn't say I didn't know how to do it. I didn't say I wanted to build it. This is about honoring the spirit of the free software promise. It is not even about building the code. People may want to do any number of things with the source code (inspect for bugs, for example). To honour the spirit of the free software promise, it should be more than adequate to grab the git repositories. Ask me if you want more details for this. To honour the letter of the free software promise, then you do need those 3.3.2 tarballs. A quick look at the TDF download website shows that it currently covers the latest versions (due to space?), 3.3.3 for the 3.3 line, and 3.4.0 for the 3.4 line. Digging a bit deeper shows this http://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/tdf/libreoffice/box/3.3.2/LibO_3.3.2-2_DVD_allplatforms_de.iso 2.8GB DVD ISO which I believe has the source code. People who actually want to do things with the source code would need to use the git repositories, as it shows the changes between different versions. You can also view online your 3.3.2 branch at http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice Simos I *did* say I don't see where the distro tells me how to find it and I don't see where the download page lets me find it in the same way (and now I can't even find the version that I am running). 20-21 tar.bz's are also rather intimidating, but way better than nothing. So, where is the link on the web site that would let me find the version I am running and the source code for it? (The same question for dependency derivatives is a bonus question.) - Dennis -Original Message- From: Simos Xenitellis [mailto:simos.li...@googlemail.com] Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 16:31 To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice)) On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: [ ... ] I have a copy of LibreOffice 3.3.2 installed on my computer. I am looking for any place that I am offered access to the specific (or, indeed, any) source code for the LibreOffice 3.3.2 distribution that I have installed (en-win-x86). Admittedly, I never checked the UI text as to where you can get the source code. To build LibreOffice, I would simply follow the instructions at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build which cover different operating systems. [ ... ] Your question is actually about whether we can make the Help→License information more informative so that users who would like to build LibreOffice, will get directed to the How_to_build page. [ ... ] If I follow the Download the source code to build your own installer (why does that have to be the reason?), I see a set of logs that tell me nothing. Under 3.4.1.1, 3.4.0.2, and 3.3.3.1 I see lists of 20-21 tar.bz2's. Well, maybe that qualifies. Maybe not. But what about for my 3.3.2? Indeed, the 3.3.2 version is not showing, because there are newer versions (3.4.1, 3.4.0 and 3.3.3) and the 3.3.2 does not fit to be in that page. You can get 3.3.2 files at http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/ http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/src/ As I said earlier, if you really want to compile, you would go for the 'git repositories' and the instructions at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build AND ABOUT THOSE DEPENDENCIES If any of the listed dependencies also have derivatives used, is there some place where, ahem, those modified sources are available in some suitable way? See the dependencies at http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build#Dependencies Simos -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion Q. Why is top posting bad? -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
