From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EShEg-0001Rq-36 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:42:02 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id j9KKdGUk011430; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:39:16 GMT Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.192]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id j9KKdEYl002045 for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 20:39:15 GMT Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id x7so262599nzc for ; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:41:52 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=MXpya2EjwIjFWPns+0a8Tdm9acy3PaHmd9kE4I+Eev1wzDiY6cFxOIzDC3EggzwcHRqVzC/SBnWNUjnOButxImzsi6LNz+98LDdy0c7dXclB0XYsxz2FJbHmHd6wJ7Y4FOIxWG3KqwQ9ZILyOqob8wajsG6M4W3LuCk0RTQZK9Y= Received: by 10.36.250.79 with SMTP id x79mr1969419nzh; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.36.139.9 with HTTP; Thu, 20 Oct 2005 13:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <558b73fb0510201341y58f49c75k50c42e833f969b7c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 16:41:52 -0400 From: Michael Crute To: gentoo-installer@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-installer] Gentoo installer vs current installation method, what about later? In-Reply-To: <1129840581.11559.47.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-installer@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-installer@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_7108_31556887.1129840912405" References: <20051020182857.CC2E7CA0A3@ws5-11.us4.outblaze.com> <1129834146.11559.15.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <558b73fb0510201312q7b75bd0bqb0101d2c33fdf896@mail.gmail.com> <2d28d7d90510201315p74eec085rd342d469b903912a@mail.gmail.com> <558b73fb0510201316o462086f5xb9b2b49f41119cff@mail.gmail.com> <1129840581.11559.47.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> X-Archives-Salt: 26e15878-f13f-4d77-989a-643f21858246 X-Archives-Hash: 0dc18c2d23eb97b9d937833921bcff2c ------=_Part_7108_31556887.1129840912405 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 10/20/05, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 16:16 -0400, Michael Crute wrote: > > On 10/20/05, Mike Rosset wrote: > > I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently > > Chris wont release them. Also Chris will try to bump this to > > another list releng, more then likely > > > > Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about > > an iso image? > > Ehh... I'm not releasing it because it won't work for you. It's really > that simple. When I was working on the ISO, rather than doing things > "right" and extensible, I did them "quick and dirty". I added > hard-coded paths. I changed pieces of code that I know will break other > things. Besides this, I *still* have to do manual intervention in some > places to get things to work. > > Basically, if I took a dump in a bag and gave it to you, you'd get about > as much use out of it. If you want to look at my turd, at least let me > polish it for you. > > Also, there's nothing "open source" about the spec files used to build a > CD. While catalyst is released under the GPL, and the individual > packages are released under some open source license or another, the > actual spec files aren't under any license until I release them. The > *only* reason that they get released is because of the general open > nature of Gentoo, not because of any licensing requirement. Basically, > they get released because I want to release them. At any rate, as I've > stated a few times (thanks for the troll, Mike!) already, I'll release > proper spec files after the release of catalyst 2.0, once there is > actually something that makes the spec files usable. Until that time, > you can consider the spec files under the FWO (For Wolf Only) license. > If you want to peek at them, I'll fax you a NDA for you to sign after > you send me the check for a FWO license... :P > > I could release what I have right now, but you wouldn't understand how > it works, since they would not work with any released version of > catalyst. They wouldn't even work with catalyst 2.0 from CVS. My spec > files work *only* on my *one* workstation that I've been using to build > the LiveCD on, simply because I was lazy and under a lot of pressure to > produce the CD in a very limited amount of time and have no interest to > spend countless hours cleaning it up just so I can release it in its > current ugly state. Most of the code has already been pushed into > catalyst 2.0 CVS, but there's still a few patches I have to add before > that goes out for release. > > OK like I said before your previous answer was fine. I don't feel the need to walk the same path twice since you two have obviously argued this before= . The statement I made about open source had nothing to do with licensing and everything to do with openness. In any case if its a sloppy hack, fine. If = I need a livecd I can make my own. In the meantime I'm happy to let you keep generating the CDs, you do a good job at it. -Mike -- ________________________________ Michael E. Crute Software Developer SoftGroup Development Corporation Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware. "In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?" ------=_Part_7108_31556887.1129840912405 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline

On 10/20/05, Chris Gianelloni <wo= lf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
On Thu, 2005-10-20 at 16:16 -0400, Michael Crute wrote:
> On 10/20/05= , Mike Rosset <schizoid29@gmail.= com> wrote:
>         = I've all ready asked for those and got shot down appartently
>         Chris wont release= them. Also Chris will try to bump this to
>    &= nbsp;    another list releng, more then likely
>
&g= t; Why not release them? Is this not open source? What's so secret about > an iso image?

Ehh... I'm not releasing it because it won't work= for you.  It's really
that simple.  When I was work= ing on the ISO, rather than doing things
"right" and extensibl= e, I did them "quick and dirty".  I added
hard-coded paths.  I changed pieces of code that I know will = break other
things.  Besides this, I *still* have to do manual= intervention in some
places to get things to work.

Basically, if= I took a dump in a bag and gave it to you, you'd get about
as much use out of it.  If you want to look at my turd, at le= ast let me
polish it for you.

Also, there's nothing "open so= urce" about the spec files used to build a
CD.  While cat= alyst is released under the GPL, and the individual
packages are released under some open source license or another, theactual spec files aren't under any license until I release them. &nbs= p;The
*only* reason that they get released is because of the general ope= n
nature of Gentoo, not because of any licensing requirement.  = ;Basically,
they get released because I want to release them.  At any rat= e, as I've
stated a few times (thanks for the troll, Mike!) already, I'l= l release
proper spec files after the release of catalyst 2.0, once ther= e is
actually something that makes the spec files usable.  Until that = time,
you can consider the spec files under the FWO (For Wolf Only) lice= nse.
If you want to peek at them, I'll fax you a NDA for you to sign aft= er
you send me the check for a FWO license... :P

I could release what I= have right now, but you wouldn't understand how
it works, since they wo= uld not work with any released version of
catalyst.  They woul= dn't even work with catalyst=20 2.0 from CVS.  My spec
files work *only* on my *one* workstati= on that I've been using to build
the LiveCD on, simply because I was laz= y and under a lot of pressure to
produce the CD in a very limited amount= of time and have no interest to
spend countless hours cleaning it up just so I can release it in itscurrent ugly state.  Most of the code has already been pushed in= to
catalyst 2.0 CVS, but there's still a few patches I have to add befor= e
that goes out for release.


OK like I said before your previous answer was fine. I don't feel the need to walk the same path twice since you two have obviously argued this before. The statement I made about open source had nothing to do with licensing and everything to do with openness. In any case if its a sloppy hack, fine. If I need a livecd I can make my own. In the meantime I'm happy to let you keep generating the CDs, you do a good job at it.

-Mike

--
________________________________
Micha= el E. Crute
Software Developer
SoftGroup Development Corporation
<= br>Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware.
"In a world = without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?" ------=_Part_7108_31556887.1129840912405-- -- gentoo-installer@gentoo.org mailing list