Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (95 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
[opensuse-project] Re: openSUSE build service - mldonkey removal
- From: Adrian Schröter <adrian@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:14:10 +0200
- Message-id: <200708140914.10359.adrian@xxxxxxx>
On Tuesday 14 August 2007 09:09:45 wrote Dirk Stoecker:
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Adrian Schroeter wrote:
> > I had to remove mldonkey in your projects for legal reasons. Please do
> > not submit it again.
> >
> > We maintain a list of software, which can't get maintained in the
> > openSUSE build service at:
> >
> > http://en.opensuse.org/Application_Black_List
> >
> > Please check or ask back if you are unsure.
>
> What is illegal with mldonkey? It is a normal P2P software, has no
> cracking possibilities and does not violate patents. I don't see a valid
> reason to remove it (or I would not have added it at all).
>
> It is the second time that a decision from above destroys lots of work
> done (the first was removal of SuSE9.3 from one day to the other) and I
> don't find this very nice.
>
> The minimum I expect in such cases is
> a) Explaining the reason. "This is illegal" is no reason. What is illegal?
we can't do this in detail, since this can be used against us in court.
In short, from my un-offical and not fully 100% understanding side, I can say
that courts might have the opinion that the itention for this software is to
be used for illegal tasks in first place.
ktorrent has the advantage that we have a real, legal usecase for it
(downloading the openSUSE distribution)
> b) A discussion before explaining your point of view and giving the
> chance to find contra to it.
As said before, this is not based on a discussion, but more on the question
what kind of risks Novell want to have. The software is hosted on novell
servers, so they are responsible for it and can be sued.
> c) A time to react to any deletions before they occur including fixing the
> offending packages if possible or backup the data before deleting.
I do not think that mldonkey can be fixed in this regard without making it
useless.
> IT IS VERY DISCOURAGING TO INVEST LOTS OF WORK INTO SOMETHING AND THEN SEE
> THIS WORK VANISH WITHOUT VALID REASON.
You can still checkout the sources via the api, I can also copy them and send
it to you, if this is your main concern here.
> For the bugtracker of openSUSE there is a quality assurance helping to fix
> such issues. Implement the same for BuildService. It is nice to have such
> a service, but if it is not reliable I have other things to do.
Yes, we will have a bugzilla component for this quite soon. We just need to
store the email adresses from iChain in our DB, which is prepared from the
iChain side now.
bye
adrian
--
Adrian Schroeter
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
email: adrian@xxxxxxx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007, Adrian Schroeter wrote:
> > I had to remove mldonkey in your projects for legal reasons. Please do
> > not submit it again.
> >
> > We maintain a list of software, which can't get maintained in the
> > openSUSE build service at:
> >
> > http://en.opensuse.org/Application_Black_List
> >
> > Please check or ask back if you are unsure.
>
> What is illegal with mldonkey? It is a normal P2P software, has no
> cracking possibilities and does not violate patents. I don't see a valid
> reason to remove it (or I would not have added it at all).
>
> It is the second time that a decision from above destroys lots of work
> done (the first was removal of SuSE9.3 from one day to the other) and I
> don't find this very nice.
>
> The minimum I expect in such cases is
> a) Explaining the reason. "This is illegal" is no reason. What is illegal?
we can't do this in detail, since this can be used against us in court.
In short, from my un-offical and not fully 100% understanding side, I can say
that courts might have the opinion that the itention for this software is to
be used for illegal tasks in first place.
ktorrent has the advantage that we have a real, legal usecase for it
(downloading the openSUSE distribution)
> b) A discussion before explaining your point of view and giving the
> chance to find contra to it.
As said before, this is not based on a discussion, but more on the question
what kind of risks Novell want to have. The software is hosted on novell
servers, so they are responsible for it and can be sued.
> c) A time to react to any deletions before they occur including fixing the
> offending packages if possible or backup the data before deleting.
I do not think that mldonkey can be fixed in this regard without making it
useless.
> IT IS VERY DISCOURAGING TO INVEST LOTS OF WORK INTO SOMETHING AND THEN SEE
> THIS WORK VANISH WITHOUT VALID REASON.
You can still checkout the sources via the api, I can also copy them and send
it to you, if this is your main concern here.
> For the bugtracker of openSUSE there is a quality assurance helping to fix
> such issues. Implement the same for BuildService. It is nice to have such
> a service, but if it is not reliable I have other things to do.
Yes, we will have a bugzilla component for this quite soon. We just need to
store the email adresses from iChain in our DB, which is prepared from the
iChain side now.
bye
adrian
--
Adrian Schroeter
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
email: adrian@xxxxxxx
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |