Subject: Mono & gNewSense - msg#00012

Previous Message by Date:

Re: Mono & gNewSense

Kevin Dean wrote: > The concept of "functions" in software is "covered" by a patent. The > idea of "exit codes" is covered as is the concept of "variables". > > ALL computer code, then, is subject to patents. This makes Mono as > "threatened" by patents as, say, the keyboard driver in Xorg, or > Amarok or any software which is unquestionably "free". That said, > there would be NO distro that could exist (not even MS Windows or Mac > OS X) if the existance of patents negated the use of a given software. > > gNewSense recognizes that and includes uncontested code. Since there's > never actually been a contested piece of code in gNewSense it's a > rather moot point, however. > > I personally stand against overly broad software patents on general > principal but don't think it's that big of an issue really, since > everybody in the world knows pulling the trigger would be MAD. > (Mutually assured destruction). > +1, this is moot. Regards, Paul

Next Message by Date:

Re: xfont-core and GLX Public License

*** This message is intended for developers and those willing to handle breakage for testing. This is NOT intended to be followed by average users. You have been warned. *** Karl and I have been looking at the xserver-xorg-core package because we've already determined that the GLX Public License is non-free. I've removed the non-free code from the package and rebuilt it to liberate it. These packages can be found on my site at http://www.foreverdean.info/kevin/downloads/gnewsense/ and they are, as follows: xdmx xdmx-tools xnest xserver-xorg-core xserver-xorg-dev xvfb In addition, corresponding source code for these packages can be found in the sources directory in that same location. These packages have glx disabled. This means installing these packages will cause a lot of breakage with some programs. I know for SURE that Blender refuses to start and certain screensavers fall over dead. Exactly how serious this change is has yet to be seen but my virtual machines can boot and display many GUI applications with these new packages. -Kevin On Nov 13, 2007 2:48 AM, Edianer <edianer-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hmm, that's a problem, we have many important packages with GLX Public > License or SGI Free Software License B code. > e.g. > http://bugs.gnewsense.org/Bugs/00125 > http://bugs.gnewsense.org/Bugs/00122 > and others they are marked as free. > > > On Nov 12, 2007 9:35 PM, Kevin Dean > <kevin-rBWrCmj++HpcFAsE7Sh47Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I recieved feedback from licensing-dGWS0fDw8IM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx today > > regarding the GLX > > Public License: > > > > The GLX Public License is non-free because of section 7 (and maybe > > others). It terminates if your use of the software infringes copyrights > > or patents which are not SGI's (or whoever is the copyright holder). > > This is problematic for the same reason as discussed on > > <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html> for the SGI Free > > Software License B, which is similar to the GLX Public License. > > > > This means that the source package for xorg-server has non-free in the > > following files: > > GL/glx/glxext.c > > hw/dmx/glxProxy/glxext.c > > > > and therefore CONFIRMS bug 129 (http://bugs.gnewsense.org/Bugs/00129). > > > > Any programmers out there have any clue how this will impact the distro? > > > > -Kevin > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 5, 2007 11:09 AM, Kevin Dean > > <kevin-rBWrCmj++HpcFAsE7Sh47Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > No, the FSF has not sent me any more information regarding this license. > > > > > > -Kevin > > > > > > > > > On 11/5/07, Edianer <edianer-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > wrote: > > > > Hi Kevin, do you got now a response from > > > > licensing-dGWS0fDw8IM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx? > > > > > > > > Edi > > > > > > > > On 10/30/07, Kevin Dean <kevin-rBWrCmj++HpcFAsE7Sh47Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > wrote: > > > > > The GLX Public License is "Unverified" thus far. I THINK it is Free > > > > > Software, but I'm not 100% sure. > > > > > > > > > > I suggested on an earlier thread about this license to contact > > > > > licensing-XGJgUMJPaP6tXF2fZOsJYA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I've now taken the > > > > > time to do that myself. > > > > > > > > > > I haven't gotten a responce, but should anyone else need info the > > > > > message was assigned an ID of "[gnu.org #346281]". > > > > > > > > > > Hopefully we can get this put to rest AND have an additional license > > > > > added to the FSF/GNU.org list for future PFV work. > > > > > > > > > > -Kevin Dean > > > > > > > > > > On 10/30/07, Edi Granado > > > > > <edianer-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > * I'm not sure about xfonts-core. The copyright file is not > > > > > > meaningful to me: > > > > > > http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/x/xfonts-core/xfonts-core_6.8.2.1-5/copyright > > > > > > > > > > > > The file includes (i'm not 100% sure) xfonts-100dpi, xfonts-75dpi, > > > > > > xfonts-scalable, xfonts-base which they are free. > > > > > > > > > > > > * Is the GLX Public License free? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > gNewSense-users mailing list > > > > > > gNewSense-users-qX2TKyscuCcdnm+yROfE0A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnewsense-users > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Previous Message by Thread:

Re: Mono & gNewSense

Kevin Dean wrote: > The concept of "functions" in software is "covered" by a patent. The > idea of "exit codes" is covered as is the concept of "variables". > > ALL computer code, then, is subject to patents. This makes Mono as > "threatened" by patents as, say, the keyboard driver in Xorg, or > Amarok or any software which is unquestionably "free". That said, > there would be NO distro that could exist (not even MS Windows or Mac > OS X) if the existance of patents negated the use of a given software. > > gNewSense recognizes that and includes uncontested code. Since there's > never actually been a contested piece of code in gNewSense it's a > rather moot point, however. > > I personally stand against overly broad software patents on general > principal but don't think it's that big of an issue really, since > everybody in the world knows pulling the trigger would be MAD. > (Mutually assured destruction). > +1, this is moot. Regards, Paul

Next Message by Thread:

Re: Mono & gNewSense

On Wed, 2007-12-05 at 14:33 -0500, Brian Kemp wrote: > Don, > > No need for debate. You find it interesting...we did it to death over > on the Gobuntu-devel mailing list. :) Full archive here - you'd have to search out the specific threads :) https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/gobuntu-devel/ > > Mono is in gNewSense. The System.Xml namespace isn't in there for > some reason, but I assume that's just ancient versions talking... (from what i understand) Mono is making its way further into gnome, so parts of it wont really be optional in the future. > > Mono may or may not be patented; Novell was talking about working > around patents that crop up, but since the little deal Microsoft > worked out with them, they may just not care and a fork may be > necessary. It is covered by patents - and thats more then the 'exit codes' patents. > > That being said--Mono is Freely licensed, copyright-wise. > Trademark-wise it isn't an issue, and Patent-wise...isn't an > issue...yet. Its a patent time bomb, and we dont know if it'll explode. I havent seen many people who are happy with the RAND it comes with. > > Therefore as it stands right now it's in gNewSense. It is not > installed by Default. I dont know of anything we removed from our (existing) archives because of patents. > > Gobuntu does have Mono installed by default--I haven't totally > verified this, but I believe F-Spot is written in C# with GTK#, and > F-Spot IS installed by default. (Not that gphoto doesn't work...) last i checked fspot came as 'fspot.exe'... it felt really weird to run it without wine. *grin* > > This means that for the next version of gNewSense, based off of > Gobuntu 8.04 "Hardy Heron" we will have to make a decision whether we > want to use the .NET stuff. Lets see what happens :) > > Honestly, it doesn't matter to me. It can be added or removed with > ease. sudo aptitude purge and all that. It can at the moment. the question is what might become dependant on it (lacking a crystal ball we have to wait to see what happens). > > Karl Goetz will most likely respond to this with "Mono. Is. Free. > Software." like he's done before on the gobuntu mailing lists. (I'll > save you the trouble, kk :)) cheers :) remember, its _free software_ , but its _patent encumbered_ . kk > > --BK > -- Karl Goetz, Debian user / Ubuntu contributor / gNewSense contributor http://www.kgoetz.id.au