I've noticed some non-free packages being built on the OBS - for example flash-player, wireless drivers e.g. broadcom-wl, dubious media packages e.g. ffmpeg, and many more mentioned as forbidden on the wiki

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_application_blacklist

In addition to being questionable legally, it's not really in the spirit of the OBS to upload binary blobs anyway.

While I don't want to spoil anyone's fun, it would suck if anyone got into trouble for this, especially SUSE. So what is the best way to deal with this? Do we email the users? If they don't respond, should admins delete packages?

Maybe an automatic blacklist could be implemented when creating a package, to prevent the most common forbidden packages being uploaded?

Also, I think part of the problem is that there is no workflow for people who want to help update packages in openSUSE:*:NonFree. How can, if at all, a user contribute to those packages without breaking the rules? Is, for example, creating a branch allowed?

Regards, Tejas Hi If I come across them, hit the 'request delete' point them to the relevant blacklist etc in the request comment and then if it's not done,

On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 00:37:25 +0100 Tejas Guruswamy wrote: ping someone on IRC to delete... Maybe we need a 'report' type button so the appropriate people can remove? -- Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890) openSUSE 11.4 (x86_64) Kernel 2.6.37.6-0.7-desktop up 2 days 9:30, 3 users, load average: 0.00, 0.05, 0.11 GPU GeForce 8600 GTS Silent - Driver Version: 280.13 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 04:30:30 +0100 Carl Fletcher wrote:

On 26/08/11 00:45, Malcolm wrote:

...

On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 00:37:25 +0100 Tejas Guruswamy wrote:

...

I've noticed some non-free packages being built on the OBS - for example flash-player, wireless drivers e.g. broadcom-wl, dubious media packages e.g. ffmpeg, and many more mentioned as forbidden on the wiki

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_application_blacklist

In addition to being questionable legally, it's not really in the spirit of the OBS to upload binary blobs anyway.

While I don't want to spoil anyone's fun, it would suck if anyone got into trouble for this, especially SUSE. So what is the best way to deal with this? Do we email the users? If they don't respond, should admins delete packages?

Maybe an automatic blacklist could be implemented when creating a package, to prevent the most common forbidden packages being uploaded?

Also, I think part of the problem is that there is no workflow for people who want to help update packages in openSUSE:*:NonFree. How can, if at all, a user contribute to those packages without breaking the rules? Is, for example, creating a branch allowed?

Regards, Tejas Hi If I come across them, hit the 'request delete' point them to the relevant blacklist etc in the request comment and then if it's not done, ping someone on IRC to delete...

Maybe we need a 'report' type button so the appropriate people can remove?

I have seen them too. Someone bumped their /home: build in to a thread in the forum about using the _64 beta flash

Yes, and it's now gone ;) -- Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890) openSUSE 11.4 (x86_64) Kernel 2.6.37.6-0.7-desktop up 2 days 14:05, 3 users, load average: 0.15, 0.09, 0.06 GPU GeForce 8600 GTS Silent - Driver Version: 280.13 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org

On 26/08/11 05:19, Malcolm wrote:

...

On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 04:30:30 +0100 Carl Fletcher wrote:

...

On 26/08/11 00:45, Malcolm wrote:

...

On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 00:37:25 +0100 Tejas Guruswamy wrote:

...

I've noticed some non-free packages being built on the OBS - for example flash-player, wireless drivers e.g. broadcom-wl, dubious media packages e.g. ffmpeg, and many more mentioned as forbidden on the wiki

http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_application_blacklist

In addition to being questionable legally, it's not really in the spirit of the OBS to upload binary blobs anyway.

While I don't want to spoil anyone's fun, it would suck if anyone got into trouble for this, especially SUSE. So what is the best way to deal with this? Do we email the users? If they don't respond, should admins delete packages?

Maybe an automatic blacklist could be implemented when creating a package, to prevent the most common forbidden packages being uploaded?

Also, I think part of the problem is that there is no workflow for people who want to help update packages in openSUSE:*:NonFree. How can, if at all, a user contribute to those packages without breaking the rules? Is, for example, creating a branch allowed?

Regards, Tejas Hi If I come across them, hit the 'request delete' point them to the relevant blacklist etc in the request comment and then if it's not done, ping someone on IRC to delete...

Maybe we need a 'report' type button so the appropriate people can remove?

I have seen them too. Someone bumped their /home: build in to a thread in the forum about using the _64 beta flash

Yes, and it's now gone ;)

Check http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/munix9/openSUSE_11.4

drill around as it's packaged in various dir Hi It's not leaving my comment either "Your package violates the OBS

On Fri, 26 Aug 2011 05:23:13 +0100 Carl Fletcher wrote: policies that only packages under OSI approved licenses are allowed." https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/79830 -- Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890) openSUSE 11.4 (x86_64) Kernel 2.6.37.6-0.7-desktop up 2 days 14:17, 3 users, load average: 0.18, 0.20, 0.15 GPU GeForce 8600 GTS Silent - Driver Version: 280.13 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org

On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 12:38:07AM -0400, Joaquin Sosa wrote:

Seriously, who cares?

We do.

Flash and broadcom-wl (and the relevant firmware, too!) should be included in the distribution by default.

The lawyers, and me, will disagree with you.

Likewise, the broken multimedia packages that ship with openSUSE should be replaced by the working, yet somehow "forbidden" ones you describe.

Again, to ignore the law is no defense, and totally childish. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org

Am 26.08.2011 06:51, schrieb Joaquin Sosa:

Patent issues surround the multimedia packages, so what about: pullin-nonbroken-multimedia? Packman hosts the packages with no issues.

yes, packman hosts the packages because the packman servers are based in Germany. We still haven´t *any* software patents in Europe (they might come.. but Germany seems to stay clear.). That´s why they could host it. Believe me, if they would in the U.S. they would be indicted and indicted again... -- -o) Kim Leyendecker /\\ openSUSE Ambassador, openSUSE Wiki Team DE _\_v http://www.opensuse.org - Linux for open minds -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org

Am Freitag, 26. August 2011, 00:51:30 schrieb Joaquin Sosa:

Flash is already in non-oss repo in openSUSE, so I don't see what is the issue for it to be hosted twice in OBS.

The broadcom firmware openSUSE ships with a script to download it, why not make this an package like pullin-flash-player?

Other distros already distribute the broadcom drivers. Does broadcom really want users not to use their Linux driver?

Patent issues surround the multimedia packages, so what about: pullin-nonbroken-multimedia? Packman hosts the packages with no issues.

No the issues aren't legal, they are closed-minded thinking that just because something is "open source" it's somehow "better."

In this particular case it is not that broadcom can sue us. But when we make it easy that users violate the GPL, we could loose the right to ship any GPL code in future. bye adrian

On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 00:41, Greg KH wrote:

...

On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 12:38:07AM -0400, Joaquin Sosa wrote:

...

Seriously, who cares?

We do.

...

Flash and broadcom-wl (and the relevant firmware, too!) should be included in the distribution by default.

The lawyers, and me, will disagree with you.

...

Likewise, the broken multimedia packages that ship with openSUSE should be replaced by the working, yet somehow "forbidden" ones you describe.

Again, to ignore the law is no defense, and totally childish.

greg k-h -- Adrian Schroeter SUSE Linux Products GmbH email: adrian@suse.de

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

On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 05:59:52PM -0400, Joaquin Sosa wrote:

On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 01:35, Adrian Schröter wrote:

...

In this particular case it is not that broadcom can sue us. But when we make it easy that users violate the GPL, we could loose the right to ship any GPL code in future.

bye adrian

Admittedly you aren't violating the GPL, so I don't see what is the issue. But your line of thinking only has two possible reactions: 1) It's absurd and obviously incorrect. Binary hardware drivers can't violate the GPL

Distributing them does violate the license of the Linux kernel, which is why we do not allow them in OBS, it's that simple. greg k-h -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org