On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 05:52, Sikon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Packages that include binaries are not allowed, even in the multiverse > repository (which includes things like flashplugin-nonfree that you > mentioned). > I don't recall coming across this ever in policy. Could you point it out? It's a matter of redistribution rights. If the license explicitly allows redistribution of the binaries, it's okay I thought. The reason that flashplugin-nonfree is the way it is is because Adobe doesn't allow redistribution except via their website.
> > Instead of distributing the actual binaries in the deb file, such > packages download the binaries from the upstream website. This is a > standard practice. What you can do is set up, say, a tar.gz file on > your web server for the installer script to find, download and > extract. > > However, I don't know about the others, but I'd prefer the GPL version > to be packaged first. Ubuntu is, after all, first and foremost about > free software. We use Resin in our company, and I use Ubuntu at my > workstation, so I'm interested in helping to package Resin for Ubuntu. > > 2008/8/7 Emil Ong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Hi MOTU, > > > > I'm an engineer at Caucho, which makes the Resin Java application > > server. We've recently created a .deb package of our server that > > we'd like to distribute on the Ubuntu repositories. There's an > > existing needs-packaging bug for Resin on Lauchpad, #105497. > > > > There are a couple of hitches, though. We dual-license Resin as GPL > > and a closed source professional (upsell) version with a bit of extra > > code for added performance/clustering. We'd like to distribute the > > latter in the non-free repository (similar to flashplugin-nonfree). > > At the moment, we don't have a package of the GPL version and I'm > > not sure whether/when we'll be doing that. > > > > Part of the rational is that the professional version just reverts > > to the open source functionality if it doesn't find a license. > > Another reason for the Pro package is that it contains some > > platform-dependent code in C, while the pure GPL version contains > > only Java; we wanted to remove the need for users to compile that > > additional code. > > > > What is the procedure for submitting something to the nonfree > > repository? The REVU page (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/REVU) > > that I saw doesn't seem to address this case, but I'm guessing > > there's some process because of Flash, et al. Can someone point me > > in the right direction? > > > > If I understand correctly, the flashplugin-nonfree package actually > > downloads the plugin from Adobe. I should note that our package > > will include the actual binaries. > > > > Thanks, > > Emil > > > > ============================================================ > > > > Emil Ong > > Software Engineer > > Caucho Technology, Inc. > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://blog.caucho.com/ > > > > Caucho: Reliable Open Source > > --> Resin: application server > > --> Quercus: PHP in Java > > --> Hessian Web Services > > > > -- > > Ubuntu-motu mailing list > > [email protected] > > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu > > > > -- > Ubuntu-motu mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu > -- Mario Limonciello [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
