public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bret Towe <magnade@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] mac/xmms-mac licence issue
Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2005 19:43:40 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <dda83e780512241943mb69047cr679ef15ea1741721@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20051225033431.GL5796@nightcrawler.e-centre.net>

On 12/24/05, Brian Harring <ferringb@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 07:22:50PM -0800, Bret Towe wrote:
> > > > i can understand putting proper warning in the ebuild if the dev
> > > > thinks that its worth the user really noting the issues surrounding
> > > > it, not forcing their ideals onto the user
> > > > if i wanted that i would run debian
> > >
> > > See above, and drop the rhetoric please.
> >
> > im sorry for attempting to get my idea across
>
> Nothing wrong with discussion- you're pushing a contraversial idea.
> Don't need rhetoric to get what you want, you need *facts* and *good*
> arguements as to why your way is right.

only fact i had is i saw a bug being closed with explianation as to
why so i inquired and here we are

> Rhetoric doesn't fall under that, since someone will see through it
> and the bs flaming will start up shortly after- thus it should be
> avoided (and yes, I'm sure I'm probably being a hypocrit here).
>
>
> > > > for those that havent figured it out yet from reading the above
> > > > i dont care the politics of the issue with the licence all i want
> > > > is the functionality of the ebuild concerned
> > >
> > > Politics do suck.
> > >
> > > That said, lawyers crawling up your ass sucks worse.
> > >
> > > Bluntly, you're asking a collection of devs, who have their own
> > > contributions protected by licenses, to ignore a source base's
> > > license.  That's going to be one hard sell. ;)
> > >
> >
> > i thought i was asking how commiting this can even affect the devs
> > or gentoo in general
>
> Again, you're asking us to take part in license violation- depending
> on the lawyerly interpretation of the license, either we're actually
> in violation of the license, or we're enabling license violation.
>
> Already made it clear in the previous email, you're asking folks who
> have their hard work protected by licenses to knowingly violate a
> license.
>
> Ain't going to hapen.
>
>
> > > > if it is the case that the devs believe the user is totally incapable
> > > > of making choices for themselfs then i suggest putting up
> > > > somewhere noting it as such
> > >
> > > Again, ixnay rhetoric; if we violate the license (which we would be
> > > doing), we're responsible (along with user who uses it).
> >
> > how does that work? an ebuild is a script or do you mean by the dev
> > testing it they also perform the same action as the user would?
>
> See above.
>
>
> > > It doesn't matter if someone else has picked up the source and labeled
> > > it as lgpl, unless the new project has *express* permission from the
> > > original author, they're not even allowed to screw with the source-
> > > the new project could be viewed as a new program.
> > >
> > > Barring the new program angle, there still is the requirement all
> > > fixes/changes be contributed back to the original upstream.
> > >
> > > Original upsream being dead means it's effectively impossible to
> > > improve the source.
> >
> > orignal doesnt matter as long as someone is
>
> Original matters, because the new project is using that codebase-
> they're bound by the license of the original regardless of whether or
> not they abide by it (iow, regardless of if they're violating the law
> or not).
>
> > and again i am sorry if i seem to repeat myself a bit but i find
> > people i talk to ether dont get what im talking about or dont listen
> > so i end up going in circles trying to beat what im saying into their head
>
> *Cough* there is the possibility that folks who do packaging of
> software might have a clue on the licensing issues here, and be seeing
> something you aren't :)
>
> Yes it's arrogant/elitist, but my point is that our differing opinion
> might have valid logic behind it.

im sorry to say i dont go with that unless they point me to that logic
i dont blindly follow with the rest of the sheep

> Basically... don't talk _at_ people, talk and listen (discourse).

i do but it can still end up being just talk at

> ~harring
>
>
>

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list



  reply	other threads:[~2005-12-25  3:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-12-25  2:11 [gentoo-dev] mac/xmms-mac licence issue Bret Towe
2005-12-25  2:37 ` Jakub Moc
2005-12-25  2:51 ` Brian Harring
2005-12-25  3:10   ` Re[2]: " Jakub Moc
2005-12-25  3:22   ` Bret Towe
2005-12-25  3:34     ` Brian Harring
2005-12-25  3:43       ` Bret Towe [this message]
2005-12-25  3:02 ` Carsten Lohrke
2005-12-25  3:17   ` Bret Towe
2005-12-25  3:25     ` Ciaran McCreesh
2005-12-25  3:35       ` Bret Towe
2005-12-25  3:42         ` Daniel Ostrow
2005-12-25  3:47           ` Bret Towe
2005-12-25 14:17         ` Luis F. Araujo
2005-12-25 16:04       ` Curtis Napier
2005-12-25  3:28     ` Brian Harring
2005-12-25  3:32     ` Daniel Ostrow
2005-12-25  3:38       ` Bret Towe
2005-12-25  3:49       ` Ciaran McCreesh
2005-12-25  3:32     ` Re[2]: " Jakub Moc
2005-12-25  3:41     ` Dale

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=dda83e780512241943mb69047cr679ef15ea1741721@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=magnade@gmail.com \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox