[opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] status report distribution week 5

newer
[opensuse-project] openSUSE...

older
[opensuse-project] Minutes from...

Stephan Kulow

6 Feb 2008 6 Feb '08

21:11

Am Dienstag, 5. Februar 2008 schrieb Stephan Kulow:

...

* the DVD5 does not have any non-oss software on it - this will allow for a simplified EULA - the non-oss medium will continue to have the old EULA then

Looks like Francis was the only one to actually read my status report and it caused some discussion at the end of the IRC meeting. So I would like to clarify some bits: - we won't take the non-oss repo away and it will be easy to download flash, acroread or your preferred application - we will continue providing a non-oss addon CD with a stricter EULA - we want to make the EULA _really_ simple in using only OSS, currently the EULA (if you read it) forbids you to distribute copies of your downloaded openSUSE - because of the non-oss software bundled So the question is: do we (as project) want to set a sign in making it a bit more difficult to install non-oss software or is the ease of use preferred over a simply license? We're very open for your feedback, but Michl, AJ and me as openSUSE management team would prefer to use open source only on the default medium. Greetings, Stephan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Show replies by date

jdd

6 Feb 6 Feb

21:39

Stephan Kulow a écrit :

...

Looks like Francis was the only one to actually read my status report and it caused some discussion at the end of the IRC meeting.

no. at least I did, but had no remark, I'm ok with opensource only dvd, community being at a clic from there. I think Debian have shown how much it's interesting to do so, on the long time.

...

Michl, AJ and me as openSUSE management team would prefer to use open source only on the default medium.

+ jdd -- http://www.dodin.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Patrick Shanahan

22:00

* Stephan Kulow [02-06-08 16:13]:

...

Am Dienstag, 5. Februar 2008 schrieb Stephan Kulow:

...
* the DVD5 does not have any non-oss software on it - this will allow for a simplified EULA - the non-oss medium will continue to have the old EULA then

Looks like Francis was the only one to actually read my status report and it caused some discussion at the end of the IRC meeting.

So I would like to clarify some bits: - we won't take the non-oss repo away and it will be easy to download flash, acroread or your preferred application - we will continue providing a non-oss addon CD with a stricter EULA - we want to make the EULA _really_ simple in using only OSS, currently the EULA (if you read it) forbids you to distribute copies of your downloaded openSUSE - because of the non-oss software bundled

So the question is: do we (as project) want to set a sign in making it a bit more difficult to install non-oss software or is the ease of use preferred over a simply license? We're very open for your feedback, but Michl, AJ and me as openSUSE management team would prefer to use open source only on the default medium.

I think that this is a very reasonable and well considered approach. You are not restricting or denying anything, only changing the method of access. Completely acceptable. -- Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA HOG # US1244711 http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2 Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://counter.li.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Francis Giannaros

22:14

On Feb 6, 2008 9:11 PM, Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

Am Dienstag, 5. Februar 2008 schrieb Stephan Kulow:

...
* the DVD5 does not have any non-oss software on it - this will allow for a simplified EULA - the non-oss medium will continue to have the old EULA then

Looks like Francis was the only one to actually read my status report and it caused some discussion at the end of the IRC meeting.

So I would like to clarify some bits: - we won't take the non-oss repo away and it will be easy to download flash, acroread or your preferred application - we will continue providing a non-oss addon CD with a stricter EULA - we want to make the EULA _really_ simple in using only OSS, currently the EULA (if you read it) forbids you to distribute copies of your downloaded openSUSE - because of the non-oss software bundled

So the question is: do we (as project) want to set a sign in making it a bit more difficult to install non-oss software or is the ease of use preferred over a simply license? We're very open for your feedback, but Michl, AJ and me as openSUSE management team would prefer to use open source only on the default medium.

Just to clarify my concerns/problems: * Having access to the non-oss software is certainly very handy. The user doesn't even have to think about anything extra in the installation, and when it's up they have things like Flash, MP3 support, and Java already up-and-running (there is hope for free Java). These are things that at least 99% of users will be using, without a doubt. When it's all on one medium, it's definitely easier -- no need to download extra ISOs, burn them, check extra options during the install, etc. * It seems to me like this system has worked pretty well for quite a long time: it's clear that it directly benefits 99.95% of users, and it's not apparent that we get much stick for it (the only time I remember is the fosdem mention from some debian people last year, but even there I think it's more an issue of just marketing). Needless to say, complaints about this are very rare and don't seem to be very prominent or persistent AFAICS. * I love software freedom and I try to avoid proprietary software at all costs. openSUSE still (and has had for a long time) has some very easy OSS options -- the CDs. The CDs contain no non-essential proprietary software; anyone not wanting to download any proprietary software (even in an ISO) could always use one of the 1 CDs. In my opinion we're hardly doing anything different when we provide a non-OSS add-on CD to when we have a DVD with mixed software, since it's still very clear that you can install from the CDs for a 'purer' OSS environment. * Someone already made the remark that it's not easy in all places to get access to the Internet. openSUSE Indonesia community specifically mentioned that this is one of their major problems. For people who are _just_ given the DVD now there's an even bigger step back. * I know many people haven't complained about this issue yet, partly perhaps because many don't know (I guess time on the list will tell), but also because I believe the main complainers will come after the release -- those who don't follow the development and don't try the betas. My father, for example, is not so happy about it ;-) That said, if we do decide to go fully OSS for the DVD way I don't think it will be the most devastating thing in the world and that we can make it better by allowing the non-OSS repo to be enabled during the install (as we do for the CDs), and making it clear that the packages are being downloaded from the Internet (so users don't complain about the longer installation time). That's all for now. Any thoughts? Kind thoughts, -- Francis Giannaros http://francis.giannaros.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

jdd

22:23

Francis Giannaros a écrit :

...

That's all for now. Any thoughts?

isn't a non oss cd/dvd? at least a simplecopy of the non-oss repository? jdd -- http://www.dodin.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Peter Czanik

7 Feb 7 Feb

14:01

Hello, Francis Giannaros írta:

...

That's all for now. Any thoughts?

I fully agree with your points. The main 'selling point' of openSUSE among my Linux using friends is, that it is a single DVD with all the necessary software, instead of multiple discs and/or downloads. Just like me, they don't like the OSS as 'religion', but prefer a mixed system, the best from both worlds. Bye, CzP --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Claes Backstrom

09:33

On Feb 6, 2008 10:11 PM, Stephan Kulow wrote:

...

Am Dienstag, 5. Februar 2008 schrieb Stephan Kulow:

...
* the DVD5 does not have any non-oss software on it - this will allow for a simplified EULA - the non-oss medium will continue to have the old EULA then

- we want to make the EULA _really_ simple in using only OSS, currently the EULA (if you read it) forbids you to distribute copies of your downloaded openSUSE - because of the non-oss software bundled

This reason alone should tell everyone that the NON-OSS software have to be removed from the OSS media. Warm Regards, Claes Backstrom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Benji Weber

09:52

On 07/02/2008, Claes Backstrom wrote:

...

...
- we want to make the EULA _really_ simple in using only OSS, currently the EULA (if you read it) forbids you to distribute copies of your downloaded openSUSE - because of the non-oss software bundled

This reason alone should tell everyone that the NON-OSS software have to be removed from the OSS media.

It's not quite that simple. Some non-free software allows redistribution, and some does not. Even the non-free version of java allows redistribution. There are two things to decide: 1: Should we remove all non-free software which restricts redistribution. 2: Should we remove all non-free software and have a completely pure system. Worth bearing in mind for (2) that even if all non-free software is removed the user can still not freely modify and redistribute the modified versions because of all the Novell trademarks and some non-free artwork included. -- Benjamin Weber --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Claes Backstrom

10:11

On Feb 7, 2008 10:52 AM, Benji Weber wrote:

...

On 07/02/2008, Claes Backstrom wrote:

...
...
- we want to make the EULA _really_ simple in using only OSS, currently the EULA (if you read it) forbids you to distribute copies of your downloaded openSUSE - because of the non-oss software bundled

This reason alone should tell everyone that the NON-OSS software have to be removed from the OSS media.

It's not quite that simple. Some non-free software allows redistribution, and some does not. Even the non-free version of java allows redistribution.

There are two things to decide:

1: Should we remove all non-free software which restricts redistribution. 2: Should we remove all non-free software and have a completely pure system.

My vote is for 2. And ship the NON-OSS software on another cd instead.

...

Worth bearing in mind for (2) that even if all non-free software is removed the user can still not freely modify and redistribute the modified versions because of all the Novell trademarks and some non-free artwork included.

Don't Novell/SUSE give us permissions to redistribute the non-free artwork (without modification that is)? Warm Regards, Claes Backstrom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Dirk Mueller

10:26

On Thursday 07 February 2008, Benji Weber wrote:

...

There are two things to decide:

1: Should we remove all non-free software which restricts redistribution. 2: Should we remove all non-free software and have a completely pure system.

is there a significant difference? the only thing that would be 2 but not 1 is java, and that one just solves itself currently.. (at least for x86). Greetings, Dirk -- RPMLINT information under http://en.opensuse.org/Packaging/RpmLint --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Benji Weber

10:41

On 07/02/2008, Dirk Mueller wrote:

...

On Thursday 07 February 2008, Benji Weber wrote:

...
There are two things to decide:

1: Should we remove all non-free software which restricts redistribution. 2: Should we remove all non-free software and have a completely pure system.

is there a significant difference? the only thing that would be 2 but not 1 is java, and that one just solves itself currently.. (at least for x86).

How does it solve itself? GCJ/Classpath are not java. I forgot to mention I too lean towards the second option, if we're removing other things, but thought it was worth mentioning the distinction. -- Benjamin Weber --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

jdd

10:32

Benji Weber a écrit :

...

2: Should we remove all non-free software and have a completely pure system.

I think the goal is to have a strictly oss medium, moving all the non oss to other mediums (changing a disk in a drive is not that difficult) jdd -- http://www.dodin.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Kevin Dupuy

22:59

On Feb 7, 2008, at 4:32 AM, jdd wrote:

...

Benji Weber a écrit :

...
2: Should we remove all non-free software and have a completely pure system.

I think the goal is to have a strictly oss medium, moving all the non oss to other mediums (changing a disk in a drive is not that difficult)

jdd

-- http://www.dodin.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

But then we would need to make sure we make it clear to the users one is open source only, and what that means. What does this mean for the retail DVD(s)? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Stephan Kulow

11:41

Am Donnerstag 07 Februar 2008 schrieb Benji Weber:

...

Worth bearing in mind for (2) that even if all non-free software is removed the user can still not freely modify and redistribute the modified versions because of all the Novell trademarks and some non-free artwork included.

The rules of modifications is exactly what the new EULA would then be about. E.g. "You can copy and redistribute. If you want to modify it, make sure you rename the product and replace the artwork before you redistribute your modified version" would be an EULA I would read :) Greetings, Stephan -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

jdd

11:55

Stephan Kulow a écrit :

...

Am Donnerstag 07 Februar 2008 schrieb Benji Weber:

...
Worth bearing in mind for (2) that even if all non-free software is removed the user can still not freely modify and redistribute the modified versions because of all the Novell trademarks and some non-free artwork included.

The rules of modifications is exactly what the new EULA would then be about. E.g. "You can copy and redistribute. If you want to modify it, make sure you rename the product and replace the artwork before you redistribute your modified version" would be an EULA I would read :)

Greetings, Stephan

I would like to have the copyrighted material in a separate package, or easily found jdd -- http://www.dodin.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Andreas Jaeger

12:32

jdd writes:

...

Stephan Kulow a écrit :

...
Am Donnerstag 07 Februar 2008 schrieb Benji Weber:

...
Worth bearing in mind for (2) that even if all non-free software is removed the user can still not freely modify and redistribute the modified versions because of all the Novell trademarks and some non-free artwork included.

The rules of modifications is exactly what the new EULA would then be about. E.g. "You can copy and redistribute. If you want to modify it, make sure you rename the product and replace the artwork before you redistribute your modified version" would be an EULA I would read :)

Greetings, Stephan

I would like to have the copyrighted material in a separate package, or easily found

Definitely - that's one topic of this weeks' dist meeting (see Coolo's email titled "Dist Meeting" on the factory list from a few days ago): - how to handle branding of the distribution We have done some steps but this needs a bit more work incl. documentation. Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Director Platform / openSUSE, aj@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

Martin Schlander

23:44

Torsdag den 7. Februar 2008 10:52:52 skrev Benji Weber:

...

There are two things to decide:

1: Should we remove all non-free software which restricts redistribution. 2: Should we remove all non-free software and have a completely pure system.

The only proprietary packages that I think are really significant are Sun Java, Adobe Flash and the wlan firmware blobs. Do any of these packages prohibit redistribution? If not, I'm for keeping them on the dvd5. My heart says screw the evil crap, but my brain says it's a good idea to keep the division with FOSS CDs (albeit with wlan firmware) on one hand and on the other hand the "mixed source" dvd5 that "just works out of the box". This way we have something for everyone. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Alberto Passalacqua

8 Feb 8 Feb

04:28

New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] status report distribution week 5

The only proprietary packages that I think are really significant are Sun

...

Java, Adobe Flash and the wlan firmware blobs. Do any of these packages prohibit redistribution? If not, I'm for keeping them on the dvd5.

I would add Adobe Reader. Some PDF's are of good quality only if viewed in it.

...

My heart says screw the evil crap, but my brain says it's a good idea to keep the division with FOSS CDs (albeit with wlan firmware) on one hand and on the other hand the "mixed source" dvd5 that "just works out of the box". This way we have something for everyone.

I agree. Alberto --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Michael Loeffler

11:32

On Friday 08 February 2008, Martin Schlander wrote:

...

Torsdag den 7. Februar 2008 10:52:52 skrev Benji Weber:

...
There are two things to decide:

1: Should we remove all non-free software which restricts redistribution. 2: Should we remove all non-free software and have a completely pure system.

The only proprietary packages that I think are really significant are Sun Java, Adobe Flash and the wlan firmware blobs. Do any of these packages prohibit redistribution? If not, I'm for keeping them on the dvd5. I just checked with our legal team. firmware blobs doesn't but Adobe Flash and acroread prohibit redistribution. With Java its pretty tricky as larger parts are under the Distributor License for Java (DLJ) and some uses and older Sun Binary Licence which doesn't allow redisribution.

...

My heart says screw the evil crap, but my brain says it's a good idea to keep the division with FOSS CDs (albeit with wlan firmware) on one hand and on the other hand the "mixed source" dvd5 that "just works out of the box". This way we have something for everyone. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

-- Michael Löffler, Product Management SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nürnberg - AG Nürnberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Alberto Passalacqua

13:50

New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] status report distribution week 5

...

I just checked with our legal team. firmware blobs doesn't but Adobe Flash and acroread prohibit redistribution. With Java its pretty tricky as larger parts are under the Distributor License for Java (DLJ) and some uses and older Sun Binary Licence which doesn't allow redisribution.

Why acroread and flash can't be redistributed? We had them on the "complete" media since I started to use suse (9.0). Did they recently change their licence? Regards, Alberto --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Michael Loeffler

13:56

...

...
I just checked with our legal team. firmware blobs doesn't but Adobe Flash and acroread prohibit redistribution. With Java its pretty tricky as larger parts are under the Distributor License for Java (DLJ) and some uses and older Sun Binary Licence which doesn't allow redisribution.

Why acroread and flash can't be redistributed? We had them on the "complete" media since I started to use suse (9.0).

Did they recently change their licence? No. The point is that Novell has a contract with Adobe and the other vendors of proprietary sw we ship. These contracts allow us to shop openSUSE with

On Friday 08 February 2008, you wrote: this software but don't allow that the user distribute this software to others (friends, neighbors etc.). All of the proprietary software vendors won't go after you if you redistribute this as they want distribution of their software but they don't allow officially redistribution of their sw. M

...

Regards, Alberto

Alberto Passalacqua

17:05

New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] status report distribution week 5

...

No. The point is that Novell has a contract with Adobe and the other vendors of proprietary sw we ship. These contracts allow us to shop openSUSE with this software but don't allow that the user distribute this software to others (friends, neighbors etc.). All of the proprietary software vendors won't go after you if you redistribute this as they want distribution of their software but they don't allow officially redistribution of their sw.

Thanks for the clarification. I forgot this, sorry. However, I still vote to have them on the DVD and without many complications for the final user. In other words, let things as they have been for years, without changing again the media organisation, because there's really no point in doing that at each release, if not generating confusion in the users. It looks to me like changing things just to change, and it's not a real evolution. To answer to Martin, limitation to freedom or not (I'm not a purist, you know ;-)), from a practical point of view the presence/absence of this software in an "out of the box" installation is a key added value for new/not expert users and it can make a difference when they decide what distribution to use. Regards, A. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Volker Kuhlmann

9 Feb 9 Feb

22:50

New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] status report distribution week 5

On Sat 09 Feb 2008 02:56:59 NZDT +1300, Michael Loeffler wrote:

...

No. The point is that Novell has a contract with Adobe and the other vendors of proprietary sw we ship. These contracts allow us to shop openSUSE with this software but don't allow that the user distribute this software to others (friends, neighbors etc.).

I am interested in knowing whether Novell pays Adobe as part of this agreement. Anyone at Novell allowed to say, or does the contract come with a gagging clause? Thanks, Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann is list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Andreas Jaeger

11 Feb 11 Feb

08:31

Volker Kuhlmann writes:

...

On Sat 09 Feb 2008 02:56:59 NZDT +1300, Michael Loeffler wrote:

...
No. The point is that Novell has a contract with Adobe and the other vendors of proprietary sw we ship. These contracts allow us to shop openSUSE with this software but don't allow that the user distribute this software to others (friends, neighbors etc.).

I am interested in knowing whether Novell pays Adobe as part of this agreement. Anyone at Novell allowed to say, or does the contract come with a gagging clause?

I will not comment on any such contracts since I cannot double check whether it comes with such a clause. Our goal is to have contracts which allow us redistribution but does not put any further obligations on either of us. Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Director Platform / openSUSE, aj@suse.de SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126

Volker Kuhlmann

12 Feb 12 Feb

10:00

New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] status report distribution week 5

On Mon 11 Feb 2008 21:31:58 NZDT +1300, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

...

I will not comment on any such contracts since I cannot double check whether it comes with such a clause.

Our goal is to have contracts which allow us redistribution but does not put any further obligations on either of us.

Thanks Andreas. I was curious as to what Adobe gets out of this paper pushing. Thanks for the link Michael - that agreement wouldn't be suitable for (open)SUSE. I appreciate the easy-install option so far provided by the disks. Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann is list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Michael Loeffler

11 Feb 11 Feb

10:05

On Saturday 09 February 2008, Volker Kuhlmann wrote:

...

On Sat 09 Feb 2008 02:56:59 NZDT +1300, Michael Loeffler wrote:

...
No. The point is that Novell has a contract with Adobe and the other vendors of proprietary sw we ship. These contracts allow us to shop openSUSE with this software but don't allow that the user distribute this software to others (friends, neighbors etc.).

I am interested in knowing whether Novell pays Adobe as part of this agreement. Anyone at Novell allowed to say, or does the contract come with a gagging clause? There's no payment to Adobe involved for this agreement but redistribution requires an agreement. As Adobe is interested in redistribution of their software they offer a standard contract to anyone: http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/acrrdistribute.html

Michael

...

Thanks,

Volker

-- Michael Löffler, Product Management Email: michl@suse.de Phone: +49 911 74053-376 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - Nürnberg - AG Nürnberg - HRB 16746 - GF: Markus Rex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Martin Schlander

8 Feb 8 Feb

13:57

Fredag den 8. Februar 2008 14:50:17 skrev Alberto Passalacqua:

...

Why acroread and flash can't be redistributed? We had them on the "complete" media since I started to use suse (9.0).

Did they recently change their licence?

Apparently they can be _distributed_ by SUSE, probably by some agreement. But not _re_distributed by Joe Sixpack, Aunt Tillie, Alberto or Martin. PS. Should teach you a lesson since you always say the four freedoms are not important or useful :-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Volker Kuhlmann

9 Feb 9 Feb

23:40

New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] status report distribution week 5

On Fri 08 Feb 2008 12:44:02 NZDT +1300, Martin Schlander wrote:

...

My heart says screw the evil crap, but my brain says it's a good idea to keep the division with FOSS CDs (albeit with wlan firmware) on one hand and on the other hand the "mixed source" dvd5 that "just works out of the box". This way we have something for everyone.

Very well expressed. I'd love to stuff various pieces of binary-only software down the bit drain too, but it's not realistically possible. Java, acroread and flash are a must. A big bonus of SUSE has always been the ease of installation - flick in a disk, push buttons, have coffee, done. I can see the purists' point, but I don't like to see the 1-disk-install feature disappear. Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann is list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Bryen

10 Feb 10 Feb

04:31

New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] status report distribution week 5

On Sun, 2008-02-10 at 12:40 +1300, Volker Kuhlmann wrote:

...

On Fri 08 Feb 2008 12:44:02 NZDT +1300, Martin Schlander wrote:

...
My heart says screw the evil crap, but my brain says it's a good idea to keep the division with FOSS CDs (albeit with wlan firmware) on one hand and on the other hand the "mixed source" dvd5 that "just works out of the box". This way we have something for everyone.

Very well expressed. I'd love to stuff various pieces of binary-only software down the bit drain too, but it's not realistically possible. Java, acroread and flash are a must. A big bonus of SUSE has always been the ease of installation - flick in a disk, push buttons, have coffee, done. I can see the purists' point, but I don't like to see the 1-disk-install feature disappear.

Volker

I admit that I favor acroread as well. However, I would be hesitant to term it as a must. There are several other pdf file readers available that are all open-source, such as Evince, KPDF, Kghostview, etc. Contrary to what most people assume, pdf is not a standard/file format owned by Adobe. They just did a very good job of making it appear as such. If you're a purist, there are alternative options. Bryen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Volker Kuhlmann

04:57

New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] status report distribution week 5

On Sun 10 Feb 2008 17:31:21 NZDT +1300, Bryen wrote:

...

I admit that I favor acroread as well. However, I would be hesitant to term it as a must. There are several other pdf file readers available that are all open-source, such as Evince, KPDF, Kghostview, etc.

There are only 2: ghostscript, and xpdf. All others are based on either of these 2, meaning they have a different GUI on top of the same pdf parser.

...

Contrary to what most people assume, pdf is not a standard/file format owned by Adobe. They just did a very good job of making it appear as such. If you're a purist, there are alternative options.

You misunderstand. True, PDF is an open format. But acroread is the de-facto reference implementation. If it works in acroread then that is all you're gonna get, never mind whether it's a "proper" PDF or not. And there are heaps of PDFs which just crash in ghostscript, esp with the years-old ghostscript version used by CUPS and shipped by all Linux vendors (yes, no new ghostscript since SUSE 9.3). And there are enough PDFs which don't work well, and some not at all, in xpdf. They all work in acroread. Acroread is a last resort, but a must-have last resort. Even if it drives me nuts when I have to use it. Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann is list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Michael Loeffler

13 Feb 13 Feb

13:47

...

Torsdag den 7. Februar 2008 10:52:52 skrev Benji Weber:

...
There are two things to decide:

1: Should we remove all non-free software which restricts redistribution. 2: Should we remove all non-free software and have a completely pure system.

The only proprietary packages that I think are really significant are Sun Java, Adobe Flash and the wlan firmware blobs. Do any of these packages prohibit redistribution? If not, I'm for keeping them on the dvd5.

My heart says screw the evil crap, but my brain says it's a good idea to keep the division with FOSS CDs (albeit with wlan firmware) on one hand and on the other hand the "mixed source" dvd5 that "just works out of the box". This way we have something for everyone.

Hi, On Friday 08 February 2008, Martin Schlander wrote: thank you all for the discussion about OSS only. The paragraph above outlines most what I read and I suggest to keep it as is. With the 1CD version we deliver on OSS only media and with the DVD we provide a convenient "works out of the box" media. We'll try to get the 1CD EULA more understandable that it just says, ..you're allowed to redestribute this software.. Thanks Michael

...

--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

Francis Giannaros

7 Feb 7 Feb

11:07

On Feb 7, 2008 9:33 AM, Claes Backstrom wrote:

...

On Feb 6, 2008 10:11 PM, Stephan Kulow wrote:

...
Am Dienstag, 5. Februar 2008 schrieb Stephan Kulow:

...
* the DVD5 does not have any non-oss software on it - this will allow for a simplified EULA - the non-oss medium will continue to have the old EULA then

- we want to make the EULA _really_ simple in using only OSS, currently the EULA (if you read it) forbids you to distribute copies of your downloaded openSUSE - because of the non-oss software bundled

This reason alone should tell everyone that the NON-OSS software have to be removed from the OSS media.

Note, however, that we have had some pretty 'pure' OSS media all along: the 1 CD installations (including the Live CDs). The question here is only about the DVD5. Regards, -- Francis Giannaros http://francis.giannaros.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

jdd

11:43

Francis Giannaros a écrit :

...

Note, however, that we have had some pretty 'pure' OSS media all along: the 1 CD installations (including the Live CDs). The question here is only about the DVD5.

yes, but the OSS community at large is very pointfull and it's a good thing to be "completely OSS" on the main medium. jdd -- http://www.dodin.net --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

5923

Age (days ago)

5930

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

32 comments

15 participants

participants (15)

Alberto Passalacqua
Andreas Jaeger
Benji Weber
Bryen
Claes Backstrom
Dirk Mueller
Francis Giannaros
jdd
Kevin Dupuy
Martin Schlander
Michael Loeffler
Patrick Shanahan
Peter Czanik
Stephan Kulow
Volker Kuhlmann