[sisyphus] [FYI] по поводу самбы и gplv3

[sisyphus] [FYI] по поводу самбы и gplv3

[Denis Medvedev]

http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/09/30/195207.shtml

Re: [sisyphus] [FYI] по поводу самбы и gplv3

[Pavlov Konstantin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 302 bytes --]

On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 09:50:50AM +0400, Denis Medvedev wrote:
> http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/09/30/195207.shtml

Примерно в ту же тему еще и http://www.videolan.org/pr2007-1.html .

-- 
> twit ? а можно подброенее? Что это есть?
По русски говоря ignore :)
		-- mithraen in smoke-room@

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [sisyphus] [FYI] по поводу самбы и gplv3

[Alexander Bokovoy]

Pavlov Konstantin wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 09:50:50AM +0400, Denis Medvedev wrote:
>> http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/09/30/195207.shtml
> 
> Примерно в ту же тему еще и http://www.videolan.org/pr2007-1.html .
Совсем не на ту. :-)
Разработчик Bacula считает, что FSF всех кинула и Столлман -- враг
народа с этой новой лицензией, поэтому он хочет остаться с GPLv2-only.
Команда VLC считает, что Tivo Clause в GPLv3 некоторых из разработчиков
не устраивает и поэтому VLC останется под GPLv2-or-later. Почувствуйте
разницу (Bacula несовместима с GPLv3-кодом, VLC -- совместим).

-- 
/ Alexander Bokovoy
Samba Team                      http://www.samba.org/
ALT Linux Team                  http://www.altlinux.org/
Midgard Project Ry              http://www.midgard-project.org/

Re: [sisyphus] [FYI] по поводу самбы и gplv3

[Anton Farygin]

Alexander Bokovoy пишет:
> Pavlov Konstantin wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 09:50:50AM +0400, Denis Medvedev wrote:
>>> http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/09/30/195207.shtml
>> Примерно в ту же тему еще и http://www.videolan.org/pr2007-1.html .
> Совсем не на ту. :-)
> Разработчик Bacula считает, что FSF всех кинула и Столлман -- враг
> народа с этой новой лицензией, поэтому он хочет остаться с GPLv2-only.
> Команда VLC считает, что Tivo Clause в GPLv3 некоторых из разработчиков
> не устраивает и поэтому VLC останется под GPLv2-or-later. Почувствуйте
> разницу (Bacula несовместима с GPLv3-кодом, VLC -- совместим).
> 

Проблема в том, что нам от этих разборок легче не становится. Что 
неприятно ;(

Re: [sisyphus] [FYI] по поводу самбы и gplv3

[Pavlov Konstantin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 936 bytes --]

On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 02:45:42PM +0400, Alexander Bokovoy wrote:
> Pavlov Konstantin wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 09:50:50AM +0400, Denis Medvedev wrote:
> >> http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/09/30/195207.shtml
> > 
> > Примерно в ту же тему еще и http://www.videolan.org/pr2007-1.html .
> Совсем не на ту. :-)
> Разработчик Bacula считает, что FSF всех кинула и Столлман -- враг
> народа с этой новой лицензией, поэтому он хочет остаться с GPLv2-only.
> Команда VLC считает, что Tivo Clause в GPLv3 некоторых из разработчиков
> не устраивает и поэтому VLC останется под GPLv2-or-later. Почувствуйте
> разницу (Bacula несовместима с GPLv3-кодом, VLC -- совместим).

Да, я невнимательно прочитал "новость" со слешдота.

Так что "другой взгляд на проблему" :)

-- 
Думаю, что пора делать 90% пакетов этого списка несобирающимися.
А то что-то Сизиф больно толстый и чрезмерно кривой стал.
		-- ldv in devel@

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [sisyphus] [FYI] по поводу самбы и gplv3

[Alexander Bokovoy]

Denis Medvedev wrote:
> http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/09/30/195207.shtml
Не читайте анонимусов. :-)

У слэшдота осеннее обострение и это не первая желтая "новость", которую
они опубликовали за последний месяц. Вот ответ Дэна Ширера из OpenChange
и Samba Team, в котором он просит редакторов слэшдота исправить
"новость". Пока что они ничего не исправили. Вообще, к сожалению,
слэшдот перестал быть качественным местом новостей. Его сегодня хорошо
перекрывают LWN+Groklaw.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm part of the OpenChange project (see the paper at
https://svn.openchange.org/openchange-docs/conferences/LCE_2007/Linux_MAPI_Programming_over_ExchangeRPC/
for details if you are unfamiliar with it. There's more than discussed
in that paper, but it is a good start.)

I just noticed the article by someone anonymous at
http://linux.slashdot.org/linux/07/09/30/195207.shtml . kdawson never
asked our opinion, which is a pity.

I'd appreciate you considering you updating the article with the
following text:

      I'm Dan Shearer of both the OpenChange project and the Samba Team,
      and I wrote the message on bacula-devel linked by anonymous'
      original post. I would like to correct the unfortunate impression
      given by anonymous that OpenChange has been reluctantly forced to
      change licenses because Samba has moved to the GPLv3. In fact,
      OpenChange see that the GPLv3 is entirely appropriate for Samba,
      and OpenChange plans to use the GPLv3 even when not necessarily
      required to do so by upstream licenses. The move to GPLv3 was one
      of two license changes we plan to announce on openchange.org in the
      next few days.

      The specific issue highlighted in the post is not a general
      GPLv3/v2 incompatibility. Code which is licensed under the GPLv2
      but no later version is incompatible with the GPLv3. There are a
      few significant examples of GPLv2-only code, including KDE as
      mentioned and also the Linux kernel, which cannot be linked to
      GPLv3 code. That is a matter of policy for those few projects. We
      would of course be delighted to be able to use their code as
      appropriate if they change their policy at some point. (I also
      recommend readers follow the entire thread on bacula-devel.)

      Most GPLv2 code includes the words "or later version", which is a
      statement of trust by the licensor in the people who create those
      later versions. The GPLv3 was created as a community effort, a very
      large and representative community effort, and in that sense many
      people think that this trust has been maintained.  Including the
      Samba Team and the OpenChange project. If you are unsure about
      this, go to archive.org and search for "Eben Moglen 2007", which
      will give you a choice of media and plain text for the summary talk
      in Edinburgh a day or two before the GPLv3 was released. We respect
      that there are different opinions on licensing including some who
      do not like the GPLv3, however it is indisputable that the GPLv3 is
      very much a community production rather than a statement from the
      FSF. That fact of community evolution supports the idea that the
      trust implied by "or later version" has been maintained.

      It might also be helpful to reflect on the history of OpenChange.
      OpenChange is an independent work built on the research and tools
      produced by the Samba Team, and direct beneficiary of a lot of
      effort contributed by the Samba Team over the last four years. We
      strongly support Samba's use of the GPLv3 as being an appropriate
      response to the current legal environment.

      The thread the anonymous poster linked to was in response to Kern
      Sibbald of the excellent Bacula project. Kern has his particular
      views, and we respect those views, but they are by no means
      general.  When we look at the numbers at Palamida
      (http://gpl3.palamida.com:8080/index.jsp) we find many thousands of
      projects that OpenChange can link against, besides all the others
      with compatible licenses such as the Apache license. We don't feel
      very lonely  :-)

      Dan Shearer
      http://shearer.org/dan
------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
/ Alexander Bokovoy
Samba Team                      http://www.samba.org/
ALT Linux Team                  http://www.altlinux.org/
Midgard Project Ry              http://www.midgard-project.org/