trial software in portage?

As software licenses seem to be so popular to talk about on
gentoo-dev how 
about this one.

Marijn mentioned on Irc that the bestcrypt license
commercial trial license 
shouldn't be a supported package in Gentoo.

Seeking further there is more....

Other licenses with a free time limited evaluation that are
supported in 
Gentoo portage:
ALMWorks-1.2
Arkkra
OTN
RAR

BestCrypt is similar:
"BestCrypt for Linux is distributed as software with 30
days evaluation 
period. After evaluation period expired, the user has to
either pay for 
his/her copy of BestCrypt software for Linux or uninstall
it. (see  End User 
License Agreement.)"
http://www
.jetico.com/index.htm#/linux.htm (Additional Notes)

Is there a need for official policy here (and a bit of
package removals)?


-- 
Daniel Black <dragonheartgentoo.org>
Gentoo Foundation

On Mon, 14 May 2007 21:26:17 +1000
Daniel Black <dragonheartgentoo.org> wrote:
> Is there a need for official policy here (and a bit of
package
> removals)?

There's no official policy preventing commercial software
from
being in the tree, so long as some conditions are met [1] --
although if
source code isn't available for a package, it's very hard to
support it
properly.

Such packages probably shouldn't be included in the default
accepted
licences, however.

[1]: http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/tree/in
dex.html

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

Add nero to that list.

-- 
gentoo-devgentoo.org mailing list

Daniel Black ha scritto:
> As software licenses seem to be so popular to talk
about on gentoo-dev how 
> about this one.
> 
> Marijn mentioned on Irc that the bestcrypt license
commercial trial license 
> shouldn't be a supported package in Gentoo.
> 
> Seeking further there is more....
> 
> Other licenses with a free time limited evaluation that
are supported in 
> Gentoo portage:
> ALMWorks-1.2
> Arkkra
> OTN
> RAR
> 
> BestCrypt is similar:
> "BestCrypt for Linux is distributed as software
with 30 days evaluation 
> period. After evaluation period expired, the user has
to either pay for 
> his/her copy of BestCrypt software for Linux or
uninstall it. (see  End User 
> License Agreement.)"
> http://www
.jetico.com/index.htm#/linux.htm (Additional Notes)
> 
> Is there a need for official policy here (and a bit of
package removals)?

/me votes for remove them (and app-cdr/nero)

We removed winex for a similar reason and imho it's better
to remove
this crap from the repository (it's difficult to support
that packages
without violate the licence)

-- 
Timothy `Drizzt` Redaelli - http://dev.gentoo.org/
~drizzt/
FreeSBIE Developer, Gentoo Developer, GUFI Staff
There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD
and UNIX.
We don't believe this to be a coincidence.      -- Jeremy S.
Anderson

Timothy Redaelli napsal(a):
> /me votes for remove them (and app-cdr/nero)

Uhm, kindly leave app-arch/rar alone; that unrar-gpl thing
is just a bad
joke.

(No idea what does the rest of licenses belong to, would
make sense to
post ebuilds names instead.)


-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:jakubgentoo.org
 GPG signature:
 http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=g
et&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F
8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature   ;)

ON MONTAG, 14. MAI 2007, DANIEL BLACK WROTE:
> MARIJN MENTIONED ON IRC THAT THE BESTCRYPT LICENSE
COMMERCIAL TRIAL LICENSE
> SHOULDN'T BE A SUPPORTED PACKAGE IN GENTOO.

FOR WHAT REASON? TRIAL SOFTWARE IS ABSOLUTELY FINE, AS LONG
AS WE HAVE A 
MAINTAINER OWNING A LICENSE OR GENTOO HAS BEEN GIVEN A
LICENSE FOR FREE AND 
THE LICENSE ITSELF IS NOT COMPLETELY RETARDED, CLASHING WITH
DISTRIBUTION THE 
APPLICATION IN QUESTION, LIKE IN THE RECENT CASE WITH ION.

YOU MISSED VMWARE STUFF AND PROBABLY A LOT MORE PACKAGES IN
THE LIST.


CARSTEN

ON MONTAG, 14. MAI 2007, JAKUB MOC WROTE:
> UHM, KINDLY LEAVE APP-ARCH/RAR ALONE; THAT UNRAR-GPL
THING IS JUST A BAD
> JOKE.

THERE'S APP-ARCH/UNRAR, SO THIS IS NO POINT. WHEN UNRAR-GPL
IS SO BROKEN, WHY 
IT'S IN THE TREE?


CARSTEN

Carsten Lohrke napsal(a):
> On Montag, 14. Mai 2007, Jakub Moc wrote:
>> Uhm, kindly leave app-arch/rar alone; that
unrar-gpl thing is just a bad
>> joke.
> 
> There's app-arch/unrar, so this is no point. When
unrar-gpl is so broken, why 
> it's in the tree?
> 
> 
> Carsten

As the name unrar suggests, it doesn't *pack* stuff, in only
unpacks it.
So, thanks and leave the thing alone in the tree; and yeah,
there are
really people who work w/ .rar stuff still, tar.{gz,bz2}
hasn't
dominated the world yet.


-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:jakubgentoo.org
 GPG signature:
 http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=g
et&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F
8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature   ;)

On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 15:27 +0200, Timothy Redaelli wrote:
> We removed winex for a similar reason and imho it's
better to remove
> this crap from the repository (it's difficult to
support that packages
> without violate the licence)

No, we removed the winex-cvs package because upstream were
being tools
about it.  We still have cedega in the tree.

We also have *tons* of other commercial software in the
tree.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation

ON MONTAG, 14. MAI 2007, JAKUB MOC WROTE:
> AS THE NAME UNRAR SUGGESTS, IT DOESN'T *PACK* STUFF, IN
ONLY UNPACKS IT.

WHY DO YOU COME WITH UNRAR-GPL THEN. I'D ASSUME THE SAME FOR
IT.

> SO, THANKS AND LEAVE THE THING ALONE IN THE TREE; AND
YEAH, THERE ARE
> REALLY PEOPLE WHO WORK W/ .RAR STUFF STILL,
TAR.{GZ,BZ2} HASN'T
> DOMINATED THE WORLD YET.

IF THERE WERE AN ISSUE WITH DISTRIBUTING THE RAR PACKAGE,
THE USUAL ANSWER 
WERE TO USE ANOTHER ARCHIVER, NO MATTER HOW MANY PEOPLE
COMPLAINED.


CRATSEN

On Monday 14 May 2007, Daniel Black wrote:
> Marijn mentioned on Irc that the bestcrypt license
commercial trial license
> shouldn't be a supported package in Gentoo.

if you dont want to support it then dont ... it isnt any
dev's place to tell 
other devs what software they choose to support

> Is there a need for official policy here (and a bit of
package removals)?

here's an idea: maintain what *you* want to maintain, dont
tell others they 
cant maintain things

if you dont like commercial software, then dont use it ...
if you want a 
distribution that forbids use of such software, switch to
Debian
-mike

On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 09:10:22AM -0700, Chris Gianelloni
wrote:
> 
> We also have *tons* of other commercial software in the
tree.

Exactly, I don't understand the problem here.

/me votes to remove vmware

Yeah, like that will ever happen 

thanks,

greg k-h
-- 
gentoo-devgentoo.org mailing list

On Wed, 16 May 2007 00:25:22 -0700
Greg KH <gregkhgentoo.org> wrote:

> On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 09:10:22AM -0700, Chris
Gianelloni wrote:
> > 
> > We also have *tons* of other commercial software
in the tree.
> 
> Exactly, I don't understand the problem here.
> 
> /me votes to remove vmware
> 
> Yeah, like that will ever happen 

Bet you wouldn't mind if the nVidia and ATI drivers got
punted though,
eh?

Thanks

Roy
-- 
gentoo-devgentoo.org mailing list

On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 08:36:27AM +0100, Roy Marples
wrote:
> On Wed, 16 May 2007 00:25:22 -0700
> Greg KH <gregkhgentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, May 14, 2007 at 09:10:22AM -0700, Chris
Gianelloni wrote:
> > > 
> > > We also have *tons* of other commercial
software in the tree.
> > 
> > Exactly, I don't understand the problem here.
> > 
> > /me votes to remove vmware
> > 
> > Yeah, like that will ever happen 
> 
> Bet you wouldn't mind if the nVidia and ATI drivers got
punted though,
> eh?

Not in the slightest 

And the load of wifi drivers that are also not OpenSource.

See, I bet people didn't really think through that whole
"no closed
source packages in the tree" statement, now did
they...

thanks,

greg k-h
-- 
gentoo-devgentoo.org mailing list