Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@g.o>
To: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Questions for Gentoo Council nominees: Council demands on maintainers & council legal liability
Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2019 18:49:17
Message-Id: 99d2b8ee-5d12-e9b0-c452-06bf21ab3854@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Questions for Gentoo Council nominees: Council demands on maintainers & council legal liability by Ulrich Mueller
1 On 2019-07-04 18:37, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
2 >>>>>> On Thu, 04 Jul 2019, Thomas Deutschmann wrote:
3 >> For the records: When I read mgorny's statement I got a different
4 >> message in first place. Do you remind the sys-firmware/intel-microcode
5 >> license hick hack around ~2018-08-23? As maintainer and as a person with
6 >> some insights I *knew* that Intel was going to revert that license
7 >> change. Therefore I didn't want to rev bump package for just a few hours
8 >> or days to avoid causing unnecessary work for all of us, including
9 >> Gentoo users.
10 >
11 > Sorry, I don't understand. If you knew in advance (how?) that Intel was
12 > going to revert, why had you added an ebuild for that 20180807 snapshot
13 > version with the restrictive terms, in the first place [3]?
14
15 What do you mean? "intel-microcode-20180807_p20180808.ebuild" didn't add
16 new restriction or changed anything. Yes, I missed that license change
17 when 20180807 release was added. If I would have noticed that license
18 change at time, I wouldn't have bumped the package.
19
20
21 > Also with the information available at that point, we had to assume that
22 > redistribution of that particular microcode-20180807.tgz tarball was not
23 > allowed, so the ebuild should have had mirror restriction.
24
25 No, my point was, at the time when people within in Gentoo learned about
26 the changed license through the Debian bug (weeks after the bump), they
27 suddenly switched into panic mode. There wasn't even time to wait for
28 Debian and other, no, people not knowing *any* details and weren't aware
29 of any communication between maintainers across distributions just
30 thought that they must do something and they must do it immediately.
31
32 Please see the IRC discussion we had in #gentoo-dev around 2018-08-23. I
33 told everyone involved before a trustee changed ebuild that Intel will
34 revert. The information was leaked through Intel PR team starting to
35 give interviews because the changed license received media attention
36 that day. May I remind everyone about the ridiculous discussion we had
37 about whether Intel(!) PR(!) is credible or if we can't trust because
38 they aren't lawyers and maybe they aren't allowed to make such a
39 statement? An hour later I was able to confirm that information through
40 Intel OEM partner channel. All I was asking for was time. But Matthew
41 ignored everything I said, rushed forward and pushed that change with
42 trustee hat.
43
44 Like said, if you can be held legally accountable and don't understand
45 what's going on I can understand if at some point you just decide to
46 take action to cover your ass because if you get in trouble because of
47 that you will be on your own and nobody will help you. Anyway, this is
48 now history.
49
50
51 --
52 Regards,
53 Thomas Deutschmann / Gentoo Linux Developer
54 C4DD 695F A713 8F24 2AA1 5638 5849 7EE5 1D5D 74A5

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies