| 1 |
"Kevin F. Quinn" <kevquinn@g.o> posted |
| 2 |
20060701111437.0ed09223@×××××××××××××××××.com, excerpted below, on Sat, |
| 3 |
01 Jul 2006 11:14:37 +0200: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 20:53:42 +0000 (UTC) |
| 6 |
> "Duncan" <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
>> "Kevin F. Quinn" <kevquinn@g.o> posted |
| 9 |
>> > a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable |
| 10 |
>> > source code, which must be distributed under the terms of |
| 11 |
>> > Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software |
| 12 |
>> > interchange; or, |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> This is what most distributions do (including Gentoo AFAIK). |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> This is not true for Gentoo LiveCDs, stage tarballs etc. It may be |
| 17 |
> true at the moment they are first uploaded, in that everything should |
| 18 |
> be available on the mirrors, but as time goes on and we continue to |
| 19 |
> distribute them it becomes false. Just try to retrieve the source for |
| 20 |
> the historical distributions. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> For example, if we hand out CDs at conventions etc, we would have to |
| 23 |
> also hand out source CDs. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
That is indeed a problem. I believe it was Solar that mentioned that in |
| 26 |
another subthread. Infra and legal should look into this, before Gentoo |
| 27 |
ends up with a letter of its own from the FSF "encouraging" full GPLv2 |
| 28 |
compliance. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
As my reply there, however, Gentoo does still have it better than most, in |
| 31 |
that the LiveCDs contain relatively few binaries, and they tend to be |
| 32 |
relatively core packages to which sources should still be available even |
| 33 |
for historic releases, should we wish to continue distributing the |
| 34 |
historical LiveCDs. The packages CDs OTOH... |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Again as I mentioned there, I'd suggest retiring package CDs 30 days after |
| 37 |
the next release is out, thus eliminating the largest share of the |
| 38 |
problem. With the limited binaries on the LiveCDs, it may be worth |
| 39 |
keeping the sources around as well as the LiveCDs, for historical reasons. |
| 40 |
Elsewise, I'd suggest retiring them 30 days after the /second/ release to |
| 41 |
come out after them. That should reduce Gentoo's sources requirement to a |
| 42 |
manageable level. Beyond that, whether those current minus-one packages, |
| 43 |
and current minus-two liveCDs, sources should be hosted on an archive |
| 44 |
server or continue on the mirrors is for Infra to decide. I'd suggest a |
| 45 |
policy that has RelEng archiving sources to an archive host as part of the |
| 46 |
RelEng process, as the most reliable and least hassle. Then they'd be |
| 47 |
there, and could be removed at any point after the parallel CDs using |
| 48 |
their binaries had been removed. However, others may have more workable |
| 49 |
ideas, and I'm not a dev let alone Infra, so wouldn't wish to pretend to |
| 50 |
decide what's best for them. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
-- |
| 53 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 54 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 55 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
-- |
| 58 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives