[opensuse-packaging] The purpose of Copyrights in specfile?
Hi, This is not a right/wrong question, but why we keep copyright of companies/persons in a specfile? Is there really anyone who will steal that? Or, eg: 1. I wrote my copyright in a specfile, after 70 years, there's little chance that my original code still in it. why should I still own that file? just for the naming? but common names like gcc.spec exist everywhere. 2. After I ran spec-cleaner manually or OBS ran obs-service-format_spec_file automatically, for a very simple specfile, it is most likely that the whole file got "rewritten" by the program, the only exception might be the reserved words like "%prep" or "make". isn't the author of the specfile automatically changed to one of the obs-service-format_spec/spec-cleaner/the specfile template/the rpm project authors? And: If I wrote the copyright, then in some cases the specfile will get included in commercial products like SLE. If one day I said I do not authorize SUSE to use my specfile, what will they do? remove the package completely? or just rewrite the specfile? If they rewrite the specfile, should I say, oh they copyed my work. because there's little chance that they know whether I wrote the specfile from scratch or I generated it from our specfile template. If I own the specfile, the skeleton will also be owned. but how can a person write a specfile without following the specfile guideline? And how could the skeleton be owned by others? they're initialized by RPM project authors... Thanks for answering my wonders Marguerite -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Am 31.08.2015 um 14:52 schrieb Marguerite Su:
Hi,
This is not a right/wrong question, but why we keep copyright of companies/persons in a specfile?
It's plainly a requirement to release it as free software. Far from being a lawyer, but: It has to be owned by someone to give it away. Greetings, Stephan -- Ma muaß weiterkämpfen, kämpfen bis zum Umfalln, a wenn die ganze Welt an Arsch offen hat, oder grad deswegn. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Gesendet: Montag, 31. August 2015 um 15:00 Uhr Von: "Stephan Kulow" <coolo@suse.de> An: opensuse-packaging@opensuse.org Betreff: Re: [opensuse-packaging] The purpose of Copyrights in specfile?
Am 31.08.2015 um 14:52 schrieb Marguerite Su:
This is not a right/wrong question, but why we keep copyright of companies/persons in a specfile?
It's plainly a requirement to release it as free software. Far from being a lawyer, but: It has to be owned by someone to give it away.
But why is SUSE then overwriting the (c) part in the specfile? If Marguerite has written the specfile, it remains his/her ownership. At least in Germany, the 'Urheberrecht' cant be transferred, it is *always* bound to the person who has created the workpiece. He/She can just grant permission to freely use it.... Cheers, Axel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Am 31.08.2015 um 15:09 schrieb Axel Braun:
Gesendet: Montag, 31. August 2015 um 15:00 Uhr Von: "Stephan Kulow" <coolo@suse.de> An: opensuse-packaging@opensuse.org Betreff: Re: [opensuse-packaging] The purpose of Copyrights in specfile?
Am 31.08.2015 um 14:52 schrieb Marguerite Su:
This is not a right/wrong question, but why we keep copyright of companies/persons in a specfile?
It's plainly a requirement to release it as free software. Far from being a lawyer, but: It has to be owned by someone to give it away.
But why is SUSE then overwriting the (c) part in the specfile?
where is "SUSE" doing that? Greetings, Stephan -- Ma muaß weiterkämpfen, kämpfen bis zum Umfalln, a wenn die ganze Welt an Arsch offen hat, oder grad deswegn. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Gesendet: Montag, 31. August 2015 um 15:10 Uhr Von: "Stephan Kulow" <coolo@suse.de> An: opensuse-packaging@opensuse.org Betreff: Re: [opensuse-packaging] The purpose of Copyrights in specfile?
Am 31.08.2015 um 15:09 schrieb Axel Braun:
Gesendet: Montag, 31. August 2015 um 15:00 Uhr Von: "Stephan Kulow" <coolo@suse.de> An: opensuse-packaging@opensuse.org Betreff: Re: [opensuse-packaging] The purpose of Copyrights in specfile?
Am 31.08.2015 um 14:52 schrieb Marguerite Su:
This is not a right/wrong question, but why we keep copyright of companies/persons in a specfile?
It's plainly a requirement to release it as free software. Far from being a lawyer, but: It has to be owned by someone to give it away.
But why is SUSE then overwriting the (c) part in the specfile?
where is "SUSE" doing that?
First, this is understood from the original mail (2. After I ran spec-cleaner manually or OBS ran...). Second, I was told that specfiles in OBS have to have a # Copyright (c) 2013 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany. and *no* personal copyright remark Cheers Axel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Dne Po 31. srpna 2015 15:16:21, Axel Braun napsal(a):
First, this is understood from the original mail (2. After I ran spec-cleaner manually or OBS ran...). Second, I was told that specfiles in OBS have to have a
# Copyright (c) 2013 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Nuernberg, Germany.
Well spec-cleaner adds the suse copyright to all our specs as they are touched here and there by us.
and *no* personal copyright remark
That is false, you can add your copyright and it is left there. just try to add # Copyright (c) 2015 Mycrazyme <blalba@blalba.bla> And observe it not being deleted :) Tom
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Stephan Kulow <coolo@suse.de> wrote:
But why is SUSE then overwriting the (c) part in the specfile? where is "SUSE" doing that?
Greetings, Stephan
Again, it's not a right/wrong question. eg: `vi 1.spec` there'll be a skeleton/template with copyright headers filled, well then a packager may unconsciously write a specfile for SUSE, which later grants free use to the community. And my second part of the question still: If I owned the specfile, what if, I, as the initial author, don't allow it to be freely used any more? like Axei said, the gcc.spec workpiece is owned by me. But, can we create a gcc package without a gcc.spec? a gcc1.spec with "Name: gcc"? that's rediculous if there're lots of people who want to privatize their specfiles :-) Marguerite -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Am 31.08.2015 um 15:20 schrieb Marguerite Su:
If I owned the specfile, what if, I, as the initial author, don't allow it to be freely used any more?
We can still use the version you gave away. You can only limit the use of future changes.
like Axei said, the gcc.spec workpiece is owned by me. But, can we create a gcc package without a gcc.spec? a gcc1.spec with "Name: gcc"? that's rediculous if there're lots of people who want to privatize their specfiles :-)
You don't own the filename. Greetings, Stephan -- Ma muaß weiterkämpfen, kämpfen bis zum Umfalln, a wenn die ganze Welt an Arsch offen hat, oder grad deswegn. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:20 PM, Marguerite Su <i@marguerite.su> wrote:
And my second part of the question still: If I owned the specfile, what if, I, as the initial author, don't allow it to be freely used any more?
like Axei said, the gcc.spec workpiece is owned by me. But, can we create a gcc package without a gcc.spec? a gcc1.spec with "Name: gcc"? that's rediculous if there're lots of people who want to privatize their specfiles :-)
Let's just pick up a real life case: python-faulthandler. The original specfile author claimed that I carelessly removed the copyright of LISA Gmbh ( which I did, carelessly). Then I wonder if I add the copyright back, submit it to Factory, get it included in openSUSE:42 or SLE one day, then suddenly the LISA company don't allow free usage of the specfile. What should we do then? Removing the package? the deepin-music-player will be unfunctional. Rewriting the specfile? that company can always claim we steal its idea because almost all our python related specfile look the same, one way or another. Marguerite -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Am 31.08.2015 um 15:28 schrieb Marguerite Su:
Rewriting the specfile? that company can always claim we steal its idea because almost all our python related specfile look the same, one way or another.
People claim a lot - but that's why we have a license in the spec files too. And that license states what rights you get from the copyright holder. Greetings, Stephan -- Ma muaß weiterkämpfen, kämpfen bis zum Umfalln, a wenn die ganze Welt an Arsch offen hat, oder grad deswegn. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Stephan Kulow <coolo@suse.de> wrote:
People claim a lot - but that's why we have a license in the spec files too. And that license states what rights you get from the copyright holder.
Greetings, Stephan
Well it answered my question and reminded me that I removed lots of such personal copyrights because I almost completely changed the code or I think personal copyrights are not correct way as Axel stated :-( I myself got rejected a couple of times because of that in my early years to openSUSE Marguerite -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
Gesendet: Montag, 31. August 2015 um 15:57 Uhr Von: "Marguerite Su" <i@marguerite.su> An: opensuse-packaging <opensuse-packaging@opensuse.org> Betreff: Re: [opensuse-packaging] The purpose of Copyrights in specfile?
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Stephan Kulow <coolo@suse.de> wrote:
People claim a lot - but that's why we have a license in the spec files too. And that license states what rights you get from the copyright holder.
Well it answered my question and reminded me that I removed lots of such personal copyrights because I almost completely changed the code or I think personal copyrights are not correct way as Axel stated :-( I myself got rejected a couple of times because of that in my early years to openSUSE
openSource lives from contribution, and for that reason I feel that kudos should be given to those who contribute. If it means 'leave the original (c) in the spec file', thats perfectly fine with me. (That means - personal copyrights *are* correct - but you still grant GPL rights to whom ever.) Copyrights are treated different around the world, and there is a mismatch between US and German jurisdiction (just for example). (Does anyone feel a cold wind coming from Redmond? ;-) Cheers Ax -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
On 31.08.2015 14:52, Marguerite Su wrote:
1. I wrote my copyright in a specfile, after 70 years, there's little chance that my original code still in it. why should I still own that file? just for the naming? but common names like gcc.spec exist everywhere.
Not so serious reply: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus :) Cheers, Jochen -- Jochen Keil SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Jochen Keil <jkeil@suse.de> wrote:
Hi, Jochen, I like this wise/cute answer :-) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Axel Braun -
Jochen Keil -
Marguerite Su -
Stephan Kulow -
Tomáš Chvátal