Has anyone here played with the YaST2 Component Architecture? I have been reading and researching the documentation, and it is extremely interesting. I can forsee an infinite amount of uses for this on a production system. The ease of use, and user interface would make a great addition to a network resource for "green" engineers/administrators to cut their teeth on a Linux system. Any examples and/or documentation of YCP, SCR, Liby2, or Libycp is greatly appreciated. . A code versus result comparison is much more informative IMHO. Thanks. -- Thomas Jones Linux-Howtos Administrator
On Saturday 10 May 2003 11:08, Thomas Jones wrote:
Has anyone here played with the YaST2 Component Architecture?
I have been reading and researching the documentation, and it is extremely interesting. I can forsee an infinite amount of uses for this on a production system.
The ease of use, and user interface would make a great addition to a network resource for "green" engineers/administrators to cut their teeth on a Linux system.
Any examples and/or documentation of YCP, SCR, Liby2, or Libycp is greatly appreciated. . A code versus result comparison is much more informative IMHO.
Thanks.
-- Thomas Jones Linux-Howtos Administrator
On Sunday 11 May 2003 20:06, Thomas Jones wrote:
On Saturday 10 May 2003 11:08, Thomas Jones wrote:
Has anyone here played with the YaST2 Component Architecture?
I have been reading and researching the documentation, and it is extremely interesting. I can forsee an infinite amount of uses for this on a production system.
The ease of use, and user interface would make a great addition to a network resource for "green" engineers/administrators to cut their teeth on a Linux system.
Any examples and/or documentation of YCP, SCR, Liby2, or Libycp is greatly appreciated. . A code versus result comparison is much more informative IMHO.
I've always been a bit puzzled about working with YaST. As far as I understand it: YaST is based on Qt; YaST is not GPL; Qt needs a commercial license if you're not writing GPL software; I've never looked at the way YaST is put together, but I assume the modules are either written with Qt, or linked to the YaST core which links to Qt. That means you need a commercial Qt licence to work on YaST. SuSE obviously have such, but I don't. Even if I wanted to write a module for YaST I couldn't because I'd have to break the Qt licence to do it. Or have I missed something important? :o} -- "...our desktop is falling behind stability-wise and feature wise to KDE ...when I went to Mexico in December to the facility where we launched gnome, they had all switched to KDE3." - Miguel de Icaza, March 2003
On Sunday 11 May 2003 10:12, Derek Fountain wrote:
On Sunday 11 May 2003 20:06, Thomas Jones wrote:
On Saturday 10 May 2003 11:08, Thomas Jones wrote:
Has anyone here played with the YaST2 Component Architecture?
I have been reading and researching the documentation, and it is extremely interesting. I can forsee an infinite amount of uses for this on a production system.
The ease of use, and user interface would make a great addition to a network resource for "green" engineers/administrators to cut their teeth on a Linux system.
Any examples and/or documentation of YCP, SCR, Liby2, or Libycp is greatly appreciated. . A code versus result comparison is much more informative IMHO.
I've always been a bit puzzled about working with YaST. As far as I understand it:
YaST is based on Qt; YaST is not GPL; Qt needs a commercial license if you're not writing GPL software;
I've never looked at the way YaST is put together, but I assume the modules are either written with Qt, or linked to the YaST core which links to Qt. That means you need a commercial Qt licence to work on YaST. SuSE obviously have such, but I don't. Even if I wanted to write a module for YaST I couldn't because I'd have to break the Qt licence to do it.
Or have I missed something important? :o}
Well i believe that SuSE explains it as such: <snip> All programmes derived from YaST 2 and all works derived from it in full or parts thereof are to be filled on the opening screen with the clear information "Modified Version". </snip> This seems to state that you are authorized to modify your YaST2, but must state that it is modified upon the login. Obviously, it would seem that the intentions here are: to curb any support issues in the event that a person should have any problems; and to correctly indemnify themselves from any data corruption that may result from altered code. Also: <snip> SuSE Linux AG reserves the right to accept parts or all amendments of a modified version of YaST 2 into the official version of YaST 2 free of charge. </snip> Here is what i would expect. They have done a great job putting together a top notch product. They are just retaining the right to add any changes that a person made to YaST2 into their product ----- (wouldn't that be cool). Surely, no one would object to this. But, i can see it reasonably to add such a statement in the license. After all, with all the frivilous court battles nowadays(remember the old lady that got burned by her HOT coffee at McDonalds); it seems that everything must be spelled out for all scenarios to the people abroad. ;) Trolltech states the following: <snip> The Qt Free Edition is distributed under the Q Public License (QPL). It allows free use of Qt Free Edition for running software developed by others, and free use of Qt Free Edition for development of free/Open Source software. There is more information about the QPL at the Trolltech web site. Note that the Qt/Embedded Free Edition is not distributed under the QPL, but under the GNU General Public License (GPL). For development non-free/proprietary software, the Qt Professional Edition is available. It has a normal commercial library license, with none of the special restrictions of the QPL or the GPL. </snip> So as long as i develop my software as open source than i can use the licensing provided. Now, if i were to develop non-free/proprietary software than i must get a professional license. Which by the way, it is not acceptable. A person is not authorized to change the licensing already provided by SuSE for the YaST2 program. They can make alterations to the source, but must use YaST derived work under the same licensing. QT huh?! Maybe i need to start looking into that as well. So much to learn ------- so little time. Man, i love Linux!!!!! ;) ;) ;) Thanks for your reply Derek! -- Thomas Jones Linux-Howtos Administrator
<snip> SuSE Linux AG reserves the right to accept parts or all amendments of a modified version of YaST 2 into the official version of YaST 2 free of charge. </snip>
Here is what i would expect. They have done a great job putting together a top notch product. They are just retaining the right to add any changes that a person made to YaST2 into their product ----- (wouldn't that be cool). Surely, no one would object to this.
Actually, I'd object to it! Well, at least a bit. I was thinking about writing a configuration GUI for WWWoffle, the web proxy. Bolting it into YaST would be the obvious way for a SuSE user to distribute it. However, if I do so, SuSE will take my code and sell it. I consider YaST to be the thing they sell, the bit which isn't free (as in speech). Which is fine - I have absolutely no objection to SuSE selling software to pay the costs incurred making a great product - but if I make a gift to the free software community, I don't expect someone else to make money out of my hard work without my say-so. So I'm not writing any YaST modules!
So as long as i develop my software as open source than i can use the licensing provided.
Ah yes, of course. The QPL. That's the answer to my original question, and the thing I'd completely forgotten about. I knew there had to be something... :o) -- "...our desktop is falling behind stability-wise and feature wise to KDE ...when I went to Mexico in December to the facility where we launched gnome, they had all switched to KDE3." - Miguel de Icaza, March 2003
participants (2)
-
Derek Fountain
-
Thomas Jones