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
next prev parent 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