FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 04-28-2008, 05:35 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

Alan Cox wrote:


But none of those start with the ability of anyone to obtain their
licensed copy freely, so there is no equivalence. You'd have to start


I've yet to see anywhere the law distinguishes "obtaining freely" from
paying in terms of copyright licences.


The relevant point is that everyone who has the GPL'd library and is
thus a potential user of the additional code which makes use of it _has_
the license since it applies to all copies. The concept of a 'stolen'
copy of a GPL covered library doesn't even make sense.


with the premise that everyone who could possible be the target of the
claimed derived work's infringing copy already has their own licensed
copy of the original.


Not everyone neccessarily has a licensed copy of a GPL work. They may not
have received one, they may have chosen not to accept the licence,


The license specifically states that you don't have to accept it to
receive the rights it confers.



they
may have breached the licence and lost the right to use it.


The license specifically states that it does not cover use.


They may even
be in a situation where national law of a country prohibits them
receiving a copy (eg US to Syria) and national law overrides licence and
contract in almost all cases.


OK, then they aren't a potential user of the other code and wouldn't be
involved.


It would be more like providing a custom case for your own copy of a record than a
compilation that includes the same content.


Thats a whole seperate can of worms, including trademark law, moral
rights and isn't simple of itself 8(


Agreed, but the simple case is where someone does not copy or
redistribute any of the original work but distributes separate code that
uses the functions of a GPL'd library - and perhaps other 3rd party
libraries as well.


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-28-2008, 05:46 PM
"David G. Mackay"
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 15:25 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > supporters over the past couple of years. For me personally, the #2 issue is system
> > stability. In their quest to be bleeding edge or whatever you want call it, I think we
> > have sacrificed way too much in reliability and stability.
>
> That is a bit like joing the army and saying "I think we should be
> pacifists". Even if you are right, the purpose and intent of the
> organisation is to deliver something you apparently don't want.

I would argue that it's more like joining the army and having them send
you to the front line with untested, or even known defective weaponry.
Yes, Fedora is designed to be cutting edge, but that doesn't mean that
decent QA should just go out the window.

Then, we have the examples of putting stuff into releases that is known
to be buggy, like the firewire stack. It also looks like they're doing
the same thing with NetworkManager in F9. The theory that things will
mature faster if we force people to test them would be more viable if
the recent bug triage hadn't proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that a
huge number of bug reports are simply ignored.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of great things about Fedora, but
it's certainly not above a certain amount of criticism. It's seemed, at
times that this thread would have been more aptly named, "Fedora, love
it or leave it!".

Dave


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-28-2008, 06:00 PM
Les Mikesell
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

max bianco wrote:


>> You write a library and distribute it under an open-source license. I

write a library and distribute it under a slightly different--but
incompatible--open-source license. Les writes a program that links to
both libraries. If your license can impose conditions on Les's
distribution of his program, then users who would get value from Les's
program are SOL. Note that nothing here violates the spirit of OSS.
Everyone involved wants to be generous. Nobody is trying to unfairly
benefit from anyone else's work. But due to a technicality, nobody can
benefit from Les's work at all! That seems like a shame, doesn't it?



Yes it does but what then is the answer?Everybody argues that A is
right or B is wrong or c....you get the idea. What is the solution?


One solution is to dual-license as much as possible with a
less-restrictive license as a valid option. Larry Wall is brilliant and
recognized this ages ago when he applied the GPL to perl but also kept
his original and freer artistic license so the code could still be
usable in all situations. Otherwise there would be issues with using
either gpl'd code like readline or something like a non-gpl'd database
server.


Another is to design standardized interfaces that can be used across GPL
and non-GPL libraries to eliminate the possible argument that something
that calls that library is a derivative of the GPL-covered version - and
keep those interfaces stable so if you do have to obtain licensed
versions of patented functions you don't have to replace them every time
the library or calling application is updated.


--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-28-2008, 07:50 PM
Matthew Saltzman
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 13:35 -0400, max bianco wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:47 AM, Matthew Saltzman <mjs@clemson.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 10:41 -0400, max bianco wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:23 AM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> >
> > > > Which is a bizarre thing to be concerned about because the only thing they
> > > > could possibly do to diminish the value of the original copy would be to
> > > > improve it so much that no one would want the original. As a potential user
> > > > of that improved version, I think that restriction is a bad thing. And most
> > > > bizarre of all is the notion that I can't obtain my own copy of a GPL'd
> > > > library, and someone else's code under their own terms separately.
> > > >
> > > The hard work is done by the original author. So if I understand you
> > > correctly, its ok with you if i use your code, improve it, and
> > > relicense it so what you freely contributed is now going to cost you
> > > money. So your hard work now belongs to someone else.
> > >
> >
> > I don't think anyone is talking about modifying your code and
> > relicensing it. That would clearly be a derived work, and there's no
> > question you can impose conditions on its redistribution.
> >
> > You write a library. I write a program that calls routines in your
> > library. Now the question is whether your license can impose conditions
> > on my distribution of my own code. That's a fuzzy, gray area, but (to
> > mix a metaphor) it's just the tip of the iceberg of complexity.
> >
> > ChipCo creates a piece of specialized hardware and releases a
> > proprietary driver. I write code to interface your library and the
> > ChipCo driver. Can your license prevent me from distributing my code?
> > If so, you and I might have a reasonable disagreement about whether
> > that's a good thing. But you can't deny that some people who might
> > benefit from my code (and by extension, your code) are prevented from
> > doing so. You can only argue that some greater good is served by their
> > suffering. Note that I want to be generous with my code and release it
> > under an open-source license; I'm not trying to unfairly benefit from
> > your work.
> >
> > You write a library and distribute it under an open-source license. I
> > write a library and distribute it under a slightly different--but
> > incompatible--open-source license. Les writes a program that links to
> > both libraries. If your license can impose conditions on Les's
> > distribution of his program, then users who would get value from Les's
> > program are SOL. Note that nothing here violates the spirit of OSS.
> > Everyone involved wants to be generous. Nobody is trying to unfairly
> > benefit from anyone else's work. But due to a technicality, nobody can
> > benefit from Les's work at all! That seems like a shame, doesn't it?
> >
>
> Yes it does but what then is the answer?Everybody argues that A is
> right or B is wrong or c....you get the idea. What is the solution?
> Let's stop going over the same ground and come up with some kind of
> solution. The end user is ultimately the only one that matters, i
> think everyone can agree on that, if the end user cannot get their
> work done then everyone suffers, so what should we as end user's
> do?should i have to pay for a brand new office suite when nothing
> substantial except the companies desire to support it has changed?That
> is an example not a way to drag M$ into this, so please lets leave the
> M$ bashing where it belongs. this will of course create another debate
> but at least we will subtly change the content of the conversation.

I don't know that there is a retroactive "solution". I know there is no
"one license to rule them all"--GPL partisans will insist on serving the
Greater Good, whomever is inconvenienced along the way. Other OSS
licenses exist precisely because other developers don't want to subject
themselves or others to the GPL restrictions (though they agree with the
sharing spirit of OSS).

Going forward, using a license that doesn't impose these kinds of
restrictions would help. As an example, MySQL uses a GPL with a clause
exempting other FOSS licenses, which resolves the issues in my last
scenario. There are several other variants on the idea of GPL with a
FOSS exception. LGPL, CPL, and several other licenses that explicitly
do not extend to linked code (but do cover modifications to the library
itself) resolve all three scenarios.

Case law reconciling the definition of "derived work" may or may not
resolve the issue another way.

>
> Max
>
>
--
Matthew Saltzman

Clemson University Math Sciences
mjs AT clemson DOT edu
http://www.math.clemson.edu/~mjs

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-28-2008, 08:56 PM
Bill Davidsen
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

Francis Earl wrote:

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 07:58 +0930, Tim wrote:

Tim:

A big company taking the moral stand versus a handful of users taking an
opposite moral stand. Guess which one wins?

Francis Earl:

I don't see how setting up livna, or complaining about the contents
therein not being in Fedora is a moral stand? It's just lazy and/or
ignorant.

Do I really need to spell it out? In the red corner we have a company
that has taken a stand on what they will and won't do. In the blue
corner we have a user that has taken a stand that if the system doesn't
do what they think it should do, to hell with them...

Both sides are posturing about principles, but he's no David, and
Goliath isn't disturbed.


Using that analogy, Ubuntu is Davids stone... throw away.

People that use Fedora believe in its philosophies, if they're not for
you, there are around 300 more distros to pick and choose from.

Having that many distros should be proof enough that one size doesn't
fit all.

Given the breadth of choices available to the Linux user, why should
RedHat cave to those that believe playing an MP3 out of the box is worth
risking their company over?

Fedora has never been intended for your Grandparents, it is intended for
people that wish to play with the latest and greatest Linux has to
offer.


Grandparents != casual users

--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-28-2008, 09:15 PM
Bill Davidsen
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

max bianco wrote:


Adobe Flash is something I can't for the life of me figure out why
anyone would use. You can't kill the adds like you can with gnash and
it leaves a gaping security hole in everything it touches.

Because it is the closest thing we have to a universal video format.
Pure and simple, if I want to put out something like a "How to assemble"
or a video of a meeting, I could do wmv for the MS folk, and ogg for the
Linux folk, and {can't remember} for the Mac folk (I have a script for
ffmpeg), or I can do flash and everyone can use it.


If you want to communicate with others, and view their communication
with you, flash is the format to use.


If you never communicate with the outside world, it's optional.

--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-28-2008, 09:17 PM
"max bianco"
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 5:15 PM, Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> wrote:
> max bianco wrote:
>
> > Adobe Flash is something I can't for the life of me figure out why
> > anyone would use. You can't kill the adds like you can with gnash and
> > it leaves a gaping security hole in everything it touches.
> >
> >
> Because it is the closest thing we have to a universal video format. Pure
> and simple, if I want to put out something like a "How to assemble" or a
> video of a meeting, I could do wmv for the MS folk, and ogg for the Linux
> folk, and {can't remember} for the Mac folk (I have a script for ffmpeg), or
> I can do flash and everyone can use it.
>
> If you want to communicate with others, and view their communication with
> you, flash is the format to use.
>
> If you never communicate with the outside world, it's optional.
>
Wouldn't it make sense for a universal video format to open?

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-28-2008, 09:26 PM
Bill Davidsen
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

Arthur Pemberton wrote:


Do what you feel is best. I have some qualms with how Ubuntu runs
their distro, but I doubt they are shared by many. By all indications,
Ubuntu is a better desktop distribution than Fedora.

I applaud RedHat for their focus, and would like to list some of the
reasons that I use Fedora and not Ubuntu

* I started linux with RedHat, they made a lot possible for me


I started with the MCC "four floppy" distribution, then SLS, then
Slackware, and came to RH because I was working on machine with RH. And
there I stayed from about 6.0 to present Fedora.



* I like RedHat as a company


I have a major stake in Redhat (major part of my money, not theirs) ;')


* I like Fedora as a community


Agree, but that's somewhat changing as the Fedora goals change.


* I like the idea of pure OSS software, even though i do install
Flash, Nvidia drivers etc


I have no problem getting the things I need, and many machines run a
pure FC install.



* I believe a lot of work gets done in Fedora, although sometimes it
seems like there is no specific objective in mind


Well said.


* I feel that there are far more jerks/iditos/annoyances in the
Ubuntu community than i would prefer to deal


Lately (since FC6) things in install have become "half-assed automated."
Hardware and network are configured automatically instead of manually,
but they are not configured correctly. In my limited testing of ubuntu
(again, have to support it) I find that's not true, printers and
scanners really just work, *or* I am asked what I want to do. FC9 alpha
never did like to use the soundcard I wanted, couldn't find anything
with bluetooth, and could speak SMB (not CIFS isn't the same).



* Fedora works for me

Used to... will give FC9 a fair shot when it eventually ships. Or maybe
when the first unity release ships and it stops changing hourly. :->


--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-29-2008, 03:03 AM
Les
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 16:56 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Francis Earl wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 07:58 +0930, Tim wrote:
> >> Tim:
> >>>> A big company taking the moral stand versus a handful of users taking an
> >>>> opposite moral stand. Guess which one wins?
> >> Francis Earl:
> >>> I don't see how setting up livna, or complaining about the contents
> >>> therein not being in Fedora is a moral stand? It's just lazy and/or
> >>> ignorant.
> >> Do I really need to spell it out? In the red corner we have a company
> >> that has taken a stand on what they will and won't do. In the blue
> >> corner we have a user that has taken a stand that if the system doesn't
> >> do what they think it should do, to hell with them...
> >>
> >> Both sides are posturing about principles, but he's no David, and
> >> Goliath isn't disturbed.
> >
> > Using that analogy, Ubuntu is Davids stone... throw away.
> >
> > People that use Fedora believe in its philosophies, if they're not for
> > you, there are around 300 more distros to pick and choose from.
> >
> > Having that many distros should be proof enough that one size doesn't
> > fit all.
> >
> > Given the breadth of choices available to the Linux user, why should
> > RedHat cave to those that believe playing an MP3 out of the box is worth
> > risking their company over?
> >
> > Fedora has never been intended for your Grandparents, it is intended for
> > people that wish to play with the latest and greatest Linux has to
> > offer.
> >
> Grandparents != casual users
>
+1

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 
Old 04-29-2008, 08:21 AM
Andrew Kelly
 
Default Fedora Desktop future- RedHat moves

On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 16:56 -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> Francis Earl wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-04-28 at 07:58 +0930, Tim wrote:
> >> Tim:
> >>>> A big company taking the moral stand versus a handful of users taking an
> >>>> opposite moral stand. Guess which one wins?
> >> Francis Earl:
> >>> I don't see how setting up livna, or complaining about the contents
> >>> therein not being in Fedora is a moral stand? It's just lazy and/or
> >>> ignorant.
> >> Do I really need to spell it out? In the red corner we have a company
> >> that has taken a stand on what they will and won't do. In the blue
> >> corner we have a user that has taken a stand that if the system doesn't
> >> do what they think it should do, to hell with them...
> >>
> >> Both sides are posturing about principles, but he's no David, and
> >> Goliath isn't disturbed.
> >
> > Using that analogy, Ubuntu is Davids stone... throw away.
> >
> > People that use Fedora believe in its philosophies, if they're not for
> > you, there are around 300 more distros to pick and choose from.
> >
> > Having that many distros should be proof enough that one size doesn't
> > fit all.
> >
> > Given the breadth of choices available to the Linux user, why should
> > RedHat cave to those that believe playing an MP3 out of the box is worth
> > risking their company over?
> >
> > Fedora has never been intended for your Grandparents, it is intended for
> > people that wish to play with the latest and greatest Linux has to
> > offer.
> >
> Grandparents != casual users

Amen.

There's more than a couple of us here with grandchildren, certifications
and full-time employment administering Linux systems.

Andy

--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:50 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org