[gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses

[gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 604 bytes --]

Hello all,

The licenses team exists since some time with an e-mail alias only,
and we think it's about time to "upgrade" to a project.

   http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Licenses

"This is a small team in Gentoo that try to make heads & tails
of license terms, so that we can detect conflicts between licenses
in packages, and know when it's safe to redistribute distfiles,
or include binaries in stages and media."

For the time being, it will be listed as a top-level project. (There
were some ideas that Licenses could be a subproject of another TLP,
but so far this hasn't worked out.)

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/20/2013 03:22 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> The licenses team exists since some time with an e-mail alias
> only, and we think it's about time to "upgrade" to a project.
> 
> http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Licenses
> 
> "This is a small team in Gentoo that try to make heads & tails of
> license terms, so that we can detect conflicts between licenses in
> packages, and know when it's safe to redistribute distfiles, or
> include binaries in stages and media."
> 
> For the time being, it will be listed as a top-level project.
> (There were some ideas that Licenses could be a subproject of
> another TLP, but so far this hasn't worked out.)
> 
> Ulrich
> 

It should be a subproject of QA.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSjhsRAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzsoIH/0QRu6mxc1Rm9DWYkPzFwHCN
+OSMyeqD82e2JB/jBCsxyR9v9VCw3UwV7ZXugJjDwO7ScC/vcHJBvEY9w/F8env7
cYsF5p65SlfQXEfcNtDeY4jux+FF8MT+StbOBQxzZZlxhU6yPeA37ciVp+WJ+xup
jLaPBaBB4lKv6tPxucgqpHfgxklXKsrKSQQM+r0jACt9MBcqJWaGa1JaUZa3xSGp
mMPLipekb6/pc4eoTY6LFmBv0KZf4qrgt0X07sZ3CM/aUyaUKV+ABl0IHhp/sLHl
4LuvhTGRyCXq4JkcSns5BnhOFrETK8R6QR3Ukn9tQ6q2FCLHP3QZPgNVCsmh4jk=
=Fpg2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 545 bytes --]

>>>>> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, hasufell  wrote:

>> For the time being, it will be listed as a top-level project.
>> (There were some ideas that Licenses could be a subproject of
>> another TLP, but so far this hasn't worked out.)

> It should be a subproject of QA.

Indeed, that's one of the two TLPs that were suggested. The past QA
disliked having Licenses as their subproject, though. It depends on
how the role of QA is defined: If it is seen as primarily technical,
then Licenses (which is largely non-technical) doesn't fit so well.

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses

[Roy Bamford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 970 bytes --]

On 2013.11.21 15:21, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, hasufell  wrote:
> 
> >> For the time being, it will be listed as a top-level project.
> >> (There were some ideas that Licenses could be a subproject of
> >> another TLP, but so far this hasn't worked out.)
> 
> > It should be a subproject of QA.
> 
> Indeed, that's one of the two TLPs that were suggested. The past QA
> disliked having Licenses as their subproject, though. It depends on
> how the role of QA is defined: If it is seen as primarily technical,
> then Licenses (which is largely non-technical) doesn't fit so well.
> 
> Ulrich
> 

... or maybe a sub committee of the Gentoo Foundation Inc?
because of the non technical and legal implications of the work.
Trustees get involved with licence corner cases anyway, so a team of 
advisors would be a good fit.

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1062 bytes --]

>>>>> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, Roy Bamford wrote:

>> Indeed, that's one of the two TLPs that were suggested. The past QA
>> disliked having Licenses as their subproject, though. It depends on
>> how the role of QA is defined: If it is seen as primarily technical,
>> then Licenses (which is largely non-technical) doesn't fit so well.

> ... or maybe a sub committee of the Gentoo Foundation Inc?
> because of the non technical and legal implications of the work.
> Trustees get involved with licence corner cases anyway, so a team of 
> advisors would be a good fit.

I'd rather avoid the term "advisors", because we're no lawyers and
therefore cannot give any legal advice.

It it clear that in some cases the licenses team will escalate issues
to the trustees and not to the council. Nevertheless, I see a project
(TLP or sub-project) as a good enough fit. So no need to invent new
structures for us. The main goal of having a project page is to
increase our visibility and to have a convenient starting point for
organising our information in the wiki.

Ulrich

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/21/2013 04:21 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, hasufell  wrote:
> 
>>> For the time being, it will be listed as a top-level project. 
>>> (There were some ideas that Licenses could be a subproject of 
>>> another TLP, but so far this hasn't worked out.)
> 
>> It should be a subproject of QA.
> 
> Indeed, that's one of the two TLPs that were suggested. The past
> QA disliked having Licenses as their subproject, though. It depends
> on how the role of QA is defined: If it is seen as primarily
> technical, then Licenses (which is largely non-technical) doesn't
> fit so well.
> 
> Ulrich
> 

ACCEPT_LICENSE is a user-controlled variable that has global effect on
a gentoo installation.
If our tree is not consistent in terms of thoroughness of license
information, then that decreases user experience and we'll likely lose
people who take "free software" seriously.
So to me this is definitely a QA issue.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSjzpSAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzu7gIAJMs7//HK9fMNqHnSZMit/3Y
hph+pKU/fgwK8qqc1qhkW2jHuxKL7Dq0ElNHNJ0+Vap242gsVDDcMAgtQHYViRTi
k0jSVDWEYxGbXzquIkcAFvQyKQDXVdNFoca9Sn2OCDJ91sSokzibQbNoSiIDvKKd
PSI0Rza0VupW/Lb6fqE998VAuL3rA4rqss8u59MZPgV9NztZIcKvAseSuSIxyu3z
XBfkauktBrFAM7qOO1Hxkgrxl2709ty/deX+24sIuyip1k9ORjeNcR169c++3VrA
yHp18KShlAJCTaf1CLBVeUz7DV+k5CzDw+loXcrbyoTGML8T8zIjZRzXisJHUng=
=08Gq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses

[Thomas Kahle]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 881 bytes --]



On 11/21/2013 03:39 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 11/20/2013 03:22 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> Hello all,
> 
>> The licenses team exists since some time with an e-mail alias
>> only, and we think it's about time to "upgrade" to a project.
> 
>> http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Licenses
> 
>> "This is a small team in Gentoo that try to make heads & tails of
>> license terms, so that we can detect conflicts between licenses in
>> packages, and know when it's safe to redistribute distfiles, or
>> include binaries in stages and media."
> 
>> For the time being, it will be listed as a top-level project.
>> (There were some ideas that Licenses could be a subproject of
>> another TLP, but so far this hasn't worked out.)
> 
>> Ulrich
> 
> 
> It should be a subproject of QA.

No it should not.  Compliance is not a subset of QA.

-- 
Thomas Kahle


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: New project: Licenses

[Roy Bamford]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1601 bytes --]

On 2013.11.22 09:38, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013, Roy Bamford wrote:
> 
> >> Indeed, that's one of the two TLPs that were suggested. The past 
> QA
> >> disliked having Licenses as their subproject, though. It depends 
> on
> >> how the role of QA is defined: If it is seen as primarily
> technical,
> >> then Licenses (which is largely non-technical) doesn't fit so 
> well.
> 
> > ... or maybe a sub committee of the Gentoo Foundation Inc?
> > because of the non technical and legal implications of the work.
> > Trustees get involved with licence corner cases anyway, so a team 
> of
> 
> > advisors would be a good fit.
> 
> I'd rather avoid the term "advisors", because we're no lawyers and
> therefore cannot give any legal advice.

Accepted.  Licenses already uses the trustees when legal advice is 
required.
> 
> It it clear that in some cases the licenses team will escalate issues
> to the trustees and not to the council. Nevertheless, I see a project
> (TLP or sub-project) as a good enough fit. So no need to invent new
> structures for us. The main goal of having a project page is to
> increase our visibility and to have a convenient starting point for
> organising our information in the wiki.
> 
> Ulrich
> 

The Foundation bylaws already allow for committees, none have been 
created yet but it would not be inventing a new structure. 

None of this has anything to do with Licenses having a project page 
or not.

-- 
Regards,

Roy Bamford
(Neddyseagoon) a member of
elections
gentoo-ops
forum-mods
trustees

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]