On Sun, 5 Feb 2012 16:56:37 +0000 Nelson Marques <nmo.marques@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Christian,
True, I'm aware of that header... Though I just believe that a general CLA (Contributors License Agreement) would be a better way out for openSUSE contributions and kill the overhead of having to write headers. That way packages wouldn't be declined because of this, which would:
* improve the submission process; * save time to reviewers and contributors; * easy to account for contributions; * provide differentiation between contributors and members (instead of the dumb solution being presented by the board segregating members, which I totally disagree, while making members a voting class and contributors a more free class would be better, unless I'm trying to artificially manipulate statistics). * ease of usage; * etc etc
I've added a small text establishing that the spec has the same licenses as the pristine source (which can make it also a not so free license for some cases). About the CC, the NC was intended exactly for the reason you mention, so my packages wouldn't be integrated in a commercial linux from which I earn nothing and some of them could introduce added value. Either way I haven't chose this road and complied with the previous old fashioned way, which sounds good to me.
NM
OK, so you want NC, so if we want to include package in SLE it just mean, that we cannot use your spec. but how can we recognize that packager doesn't look at your spec? Also question is what is your added value except collection data and write it to metadata which RPM build understand. Package name, version, license, description is usually taken from package homepage so not your data. Patches usually ( depending on license of package ) are under same license as package and they are not part of spec. So only remaining part is scripts inside spec and files section. Scripts are usually trivial text modification which is hard to recognize who do it first or if it is copied or reinvented ( of course there is some exceptions ). So remains files. Do you think that your files section is so important that you cannot use it? Another question is who benefit from it? If package is included in commercial linux it means, that there is dedicated person who spend part of their work-time to improve such package, so package benefit from ( upstream and also our spec file and also opensuse, because opensuse is base for commercial linux, so we fix also factory package ). So if you make your spec NC there is chance that commercial linux doesn't use it or maintainer need to spend part of their time to create new one instead of improving package. And last think that comes to my mind ( I am not layer or license expert ) what means that build metadata is under NC? That we should not build it for money? But in commercial linux you don't pay for packages, but for support. So it doesn't make much sense for me. Josef -- Josef Reidinger Software Engineer Appliance Department SUSE LINUX, s. r. o. Lihovarska 1060/12 190 00 Praha 9 Czech Republic jreidinger@suse.com SUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org