Hello folks,

Qt-creator[1] program can support perforce[2] software configuration manager.
My concern is the perforce license. According to their site[3] there is a
dual(?) license.
There is the standard commercial license[4] and one for free software
development[4]. Should I add both? Or am I missing something?
Doing some research I found out that perforce-cli was in the portage back in
2006 but not anymore. Can somebody recall the reason why it is not there
anymore? If it wasn't a license issue , I want to bring it back ( at least the
client for now ).
I am waiting your suggestions. Thank you

[1] http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo-x86/dev-util/qt-creator/
[2] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/
[3] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#license
[4] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#opensource
--
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
KDE/Qt/Sunrise/Sound
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr

On Saturday 21 March 2009, Markos Chandras wrote:
> Doing some research I found out that perforce-cli was in the portage
> back in 2006 but not anymore. Can somebody recall the reason why it
> is not there anymore? If it wasn't a license issue , I want to bring
> it back ( at least the client for now ).
> I am waiting your suggestions. Thank you

Revisiting old bugs, it seems it was removed due to distfile collisions
(same name, different content in several perforce packages):
https://bugs.gentoo.org/123923

Since we have src_uri arrows now, this is no show-stopper.


Robert

On Saturday 21 March 2009 14:50:08 Robert Buchholz wrote:
> On Saturday 21 March 2009, Markos Chandras wrote:
> > Doing some research I found out that perforce-cli was in the portage
> > back in 2006 but not anymore. Can somebody recall the reason why it
> > is not there anymore? If it wasn't a license issue , I want to bring
> > it back ( at least the client for now ).
> > I am waiting your suggestions. Thank you
>
> Revisiting old bugs, it seems it was removed due to distfile collisions
> (same name, different content in several perforce packages):
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/123923
>
> Since we have src_uri arrows now, this is no show-stopper.
>
>
> Robert
Robert,
I already used src_uri arrows on that ebuild. The thing is that I don't know
how mirrors treat the arrows. Will mirrors save the file using the the normal
filename or the one I specified on arrow? If the later, I need to have
RESTRICT="nomirror" or something. I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but
couldn't find how mirrors behave with arrows.
About the licensing issue, i think that the best is to make it dual license
cause this is what I get by reading their site over and over again.

If there are no objections, this package will be on tree withing the next 48
hours.

Thanks
- -
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
KDE/Qt/Sunrise/Sound
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr

Markos Chandras wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> Qt-creator[1] program can support perforce[2] software configuration manager.
> My concern is the perforce license. According to their site[3] there is a
> dual(?) license.
> There is the standard commercial license[4] and one for free software
> development[4]. Should I add both? Or am I missing something?

How about a single text file stating the main facts from
[3] and [4]?



Sebastian


> [3] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#license
> [4] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#opensource

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:39:43 +0200
Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but couldn't find how mirrors
> behave with arrows.

It's supposed to say this:

> In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used
> when saving to {DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of
> the arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly
> listed on the left of the arrow, if {mirror://} is used), the
> filename to the right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the
> filename in the URI.

But it didn't, thanks to a formatting screwup. I've fixed that now.

--
Ciaran McCreesh

On Saturday 21 March 2009 15:46:19 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Markos Chandras wrote:
> > Hello folks,
> >
> > Qt-creator[1] program can support perforce[2] software configuration
> > manager. My concern is the perforce license. According to their site[3]
> > there is a dual(?) license.
> > There is the standard commercial license[4] and one for free software
> > development[4]. Should I add both? Or am I missing something?
>
> How about a single text file stating the main facts from
> [3] and [4]?
>
>
>
> Sebastian
>
> > [3] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#license
> > [4] http://www.perforce.com/perforce/price.html#opensource

Sebastian,
Why would I want to do that? The license files should stay untouched. There is
nothing wrong of having both licenses on ebuild since this is the upstream
policy.
--
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
KDE/Qt/Sunrise/Sound
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr

Markos Chandras wrote:
> Sebastian,
> Why would I want to do that? The license files should stay untouched. There is
> nothing wrong of having both licenses on ebuild since this is the upstream
> policy.

I forgot that the license files upstream might change
so I agree you need a copy downstream.

However, if the "End User License Agreement for
Open Source Software Development" document alone
doesn't say that

1) "Perforce Software reserves the right to approve
the Open Source license" (from [4]) and

2) "Execution of a End User License Agreement [..]
is required" (from [4])

(which at least I didn't find in the PDF) you will have
to add that somewhere somehow because people could
otherwise start using then software under that license
without being permitted to.

Also, please pay extra attention to the difference
between the terms "Open Source License" and
"Open Source End User License Agreement". Thank you.



Sebastian

On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
<ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:39:43 +0200
> Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but couldn't find how mirrors
>> behave with arrows.
>
> It's supposed to say this:
>
>> In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used
>> when saving to {DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of
>> the arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly
>> listed on the left of the arrow, if {mirror://} is used), the
>> filename to the right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the
>> filename in the URI.
>
> But it didn't, thanks to a formatting screwup. I've fixed that now.

I think Markos is talking about the actual mirror-fetch script itself.
The gentoo mirrors still use a flat namespace so someone will need to
update mirror-fetch to rename files based on src_uri arrows. And by
'someone' I mean Zac.

-A

>
> --
> Ciaran McCreesh
>

On Saturday 21 March 2009 21:41:39 Alec Warner wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
>
> <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:39:43 +0200
> >
> > Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but couldn't find how mirrors
> >> behave with arrows.
> >
> > It's supposed to say this:
> >> In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used
> >> when saving to {DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of
> >> the arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly
> >> listed on the left of the arrow, if {mirror://} is used), the
> >> filename to the right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the
> >> filename in the URI.
> >
> > But it didn't, thanks to a formatting screwup. I've fixed that now.
>
> I think Markos is talking about the actual mirror-fetch script itself.
> The gentoo mirrors still use a flat namespace so someone will need to
> update mirror-fetch to rename files based on src_uri arrows. And by
> 'someone' I mean Zac.
>
> -A
>
> > --
> > Ciaran McCreesh
Actually I didn't understand completely what Ciaran said. I am still not
quite sure how mirrors treat the SRC_URI with arrows. Will they fetch the file
from upstream as save it with the filename I specified on arrow or they will
save it respecting the upstream filename?
--
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
KDE/Qt/Sunrise/Sound
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr

On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Saturday 21 March 2009 21:41:39 Alec Warner wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 7:11 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
>>
>> <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:39:43 +0200
>> >
>> > Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> >> I took a look on EAPI2 specifications but couldn't find how mirrors
>> >> behave with arrows.
>> >
>> > It's supposed to say this:
>> >> In EAPIs supporting arrows, if an arrow is used, the filename used
>> >> when saving to {DISTDIR} shall instead be the name on the right of
>> >> the arrow. When consulting mirrors (except for those explicitly
>> >> listed on the left of the arrow, if {mirror://} is used), the
>> >> filename to the right of the arrow shall be requested instead of the
>> >> filename in the URI.
>> >
>> > But it didn't, thanks to a formatting screwup. I've fixed that now.
>>
>> I think Markos is talking about the actual mirror-fetch script itself.
>> The gentoo mirrors still use a flat namespace so someone will need to
>> update mirror-fetch to rename files based on src_uri arrows. And by
>> 'someone' I mean Zac.
>>
>> -A
>>
>> > --
>> > Ciaran McCreesh
> Actually I didn't understand completely what Ciaran said. I am still not
> quite sure how mirrors treat the SRC_URI with arrows. Will they fetch the file
> from upstream as save it with the filename I specified on arrow or they will
> save it respecting the upstream filename?

I think you will encounter namespace collisions, thats why I CC'd zac
as he maintains mirror-dist ;p

> --
> Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
> Gentoo Linux Developer
> KDE/Qt/Sunrise/Sound
> Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.gr
>