| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Lance Albertson wrote: |
| 5 |
> Peter Gordon wrote: |
| 6 |
>> Matthew Marlowe wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> If we could get a license donated, my vote would be to switch to Atlassian |
| 8 |
>>> Jira, http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira. It seems to be gaining |
| 9 |
>>> mindshare rather quickly, and the company I work for just shelled out $2,400 |
| 10 |
>>> because they liked it so much more than RT/Bugzilla. I believe it supports |
| 11 |
>>> multiple DB backends, including all the usual suspects. |
| 12 |
>> Maybe it's just me, but I think that having such a core component of the |
| 13 |
>> distribution be proprietary is in complete violation of Gentoo's Social |
| 14 |
>> Contract[1] (if not the letter of it, then its spirit of openness). It |
| 15 |
>> states: |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> "Gentoo will never never depend upon a piece of software or |
| 18 |
>> metadata unless it conforms to the GNU General Public License, |
| 19 |
>> the GNU Lesser General Public License, the Creative Commons - |
| 20 |
>> Attribution/Share Alike or some other license approved by the |
| 21 |
>> Open Source Initiative (OSI)." |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> Isn't this one of the driving reasons why our forums run phpBB instead |
| 24 |
>> of something like vBulletin, for example? :) |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> I'm not entirely sure if this is directed towards the supporting web |
| 29 |
> applications or of Gentoo itself. To me its directed towards the meta |
| 30 |
> distribution and not any of the underlying support mechanisms of Gentoo. |
| 31 |
> If we were to use some non-gpl webapp, the underlying Gentoo system you |
| 32 |
> run does not depend on a non-gpl piece of software. A bug tracking |
| 33 |
> system is not an underlying component of Gentoo. Its just a tool that |
| 34 |
> helps with development of Gentoo. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> But anyways, some people view it in the strict sense and they're |
| 37 |
> entitled to it. That's just how I view it when I read it. Its a bit |
| 38 |
> vague on what Gentoo really is. Is it talking only about the meta |
| 39 |
> distribution? Or that plus the underlying supporting systems that help |
| 40 |
> run Gentoo? |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
I think it is perfectly valid we use this kind of tools for development; |
| 44 |
as far as i know, our SC refers to those components (in form of software |
| 45 |
and metadata) to be free software upon which a user depend to build a |
| 46 |
Gentoo system, and this isn't one of those components. Though i admit it |
| 47 |
might bring some kind of 'controversy' . |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
/me remenbers bitkeeper |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
- -- |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Luis F. Araujo "araujo at gentoo.org" |
| 55 |
Gentoo Linux |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 59 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
iD8DBQFE1ESYdZ42PGEF17URApflAKCAkBVcgD5hgS0ASFyNXz3wS1Mx5ACg6Tov |
| 62 |
IjDaN+ENPP1t9nckRAsf2ZA= |
| 63 |
=6fxU |
| 64 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 65 |
-- |
| 66 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives