Features/Artistic1Removal

From FedoraProject

< Features(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(20 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 10: Line 10:
 
== Current status ==
 
== Current status ==
 
* Targeted release: [[Releases/10|  Fedora 10]]  
 
* Targeted release: [[Releases/10|  Fedora 10]]  
* Last updated: Fri Jul 18, 2008
+
* Last updated: Mon Sep 15, 2008
* Percentage of completion: 75%
+
* Percentage of completion: 100%
  
 
== Detailed Description ==
 
== Detailed Description ==
Line 21: Line 21:
 
# The FSF says it isn't free. They say that the text is vague, and that it is open to misinterpretation.
 
# The FSF says it isn't free. They say that the text is vague, and that it is open to misinterpretation.
 
# The perl community (the original authors) agrees with this assessment. They went so far as to rewrite the Artistic license to resolve all the identified problems (see http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_2_0).
 
# The perl community (the original authors) agrees with this assessment. They went so far as to rewrite the Artistic license to resolve all the identified problems (see http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_2_0).
# The Artistic License (1.0) recently went to trial in the US and lost. The judge interpreted it in a very negative way. See: http://lawandlifesiliconvalley.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-open-source-legal-decision-jacobsen.html
 
 
# The OSI has "superseded" the license, recommending strongly that all users move to Artistic 2.0: http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php
 
# The OSI has "superseded" the license, recommending strongly that all users move to Artistic 2.0: http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php
  
Line 38: Line 37:
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || thias
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || thias
 
|-
 
|-
| '''Status'''        || I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received.
+
| style="background-color:red;"|'''Status'''       || '''DEAD.PACKAGE''' I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received.
|-
+
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
+
|}
+
 
+
=== perl-Authen-Radius ===
+
{|
+
| '''Maintainer'''   || ixs
+
|-
+
| '''Status'''       || I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received.
+
|-
+
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
+
|}
+
 
+
=== perl-Class-Data-Accessor ===
+
{|
+
| '''Maintainer'''    || cweyl
+
|-
+
| '''Status'''        || Spoke to upstream on irc (Friday July 11, 2008), plans to relicense to GPL+ or Artistic in the near future.
+
 
|-
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
Line 65: Line 46:
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || sindrepb
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || sindrepb
 
|-
 
|-
| '''Status'''        || Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing.
+
|  style="background-color:red;"|'''Status'''        || '''DEAD.PACKAGE''' Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing.
 
|-
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || perl-Net-Packet , perl-Net-Write , perl-DBIx-SQLite-Simple , perl-Net-Packet-Target
 
| '''Dependency of''' || perl-Net-Packet , perl-Net-Write , perl-DBIx-SQLite-Simple , perl-Net-Packet-Target
Line 74: Line 55:
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || sindrepb
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || sindrepb
 
|-
 
|-
| '''Status'''        || Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
+
|  style="background-color:red;"|'''Status'''        || '''DEAD.PACKAGE''' Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
 
|-
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
 
|}
 
|}
  
=== perl-Font-TTF ===
+
=== perl-Net-Packet ===
 
{|
 
{|
| '''Maintainer'''    || nim
+
| '''Maintainer'''    || sindrepb
 
|-
 
|-
| '''Status'''        || Waiting for upstream to clearly confirm we can redistribute under Artistic 2.0 (last update Friday, July 18, 2008)
+
|  style="background-color:red;"|'''Status'''        || '''DEAD.PACKAGE''' Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
 
|-
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
 
|}
 
|}
  
=== perl-IO-Multiplex ===
+
=== perl-Net-Packet-Target ===
{|
+
| '''Maintainer'''    || lmb
+
|-
+
| '''Status'''        || I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received.
+
|-
+
| '''Dependency of''' || perl-Net-Server , conmux
+
|}
+
 
+
=== perl-Net-Packet ===
+
 
{|
 
{|
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || sindrepb
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || sindrepb
 
|-
 
|-
| '''Status'''        || Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
+
|  style="background-color:red;"|'''Status'''        || '''DEAD.PACKAGE''' Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
 
|-
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
Line 110: Line 82:
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || sindrepb
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || sindrepb
 
|-
 
|-
| '''Status'''        || Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
+
|  style="background-color:red;"|'''Status'''        || '''DEAD.PACKAGE''' Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
 
|-
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || perl-Net-Packet
 
| '''Dependency of''' || perl-Net-Packet
|}
 
 
=== perl-NetAddr-IP ===
 
{|
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || ixs
 
|-
 
| '''Status'''        || I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received.
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || ltsp-server , perl-Mail-SPF
 
|}
 
 
=== perl-Razor-Agent ===
 
{|
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || robert
 
|-
 
| '''Status'''        || Author plans to release under Artistic 2.0 this week (email received Tuesday July 15, 2008)
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || amavisd-new
 
|}
 
 
=== perl-XML-Grove ===
 
{|
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || kasal
 
|-
 
| '''Status'''        || I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received. Almost certainly abandoned, last release in 1999.
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
 
 
|}
 
|}
  
Line 146: Line 91:
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || pgadmin3
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || pgadmin3
 
|-
 
|-
| '''Status'''        || In 2007, upstream agreed to relicense in principle, most contributors were ok with Artistic 2.0, then thread died off. Code is still under Artistic 1.0. Emailed upstream again on Friday, July 11, 2008 to try to restart the process. Upstream is working with the SFLC to try to relicense (confirmed via email on Sat July 12, 2008).
+
|  style="background-color:yellow;"|'''Status'''        || In 2007, upstream agreed to relicense in principle, most contributors were ok with Artistic 2.0, then thread died off. Code is still under Artistic 1.0. Emailed upstream again on Friday, July 11, 2008 to try to restart the process. Upstream is working with the SFLC to try to relicense (confirmed via email on Sat July 12, 2008). Package blocked in F-10, but likely to be revived at some point in the near future, so not killed off entirely.
 
|-
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
|}
 
 
=== qstat ===
 
{|
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || andriy
 
|-
 
| '''Status'''        || I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received. May be abandoned, last release in 2006.
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || nagios-plugins-game , xqf
 
 
|}
 
|}
  
Line 164: Line 100:
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || jamatos
 
| '''Maintainer'''    || jamatos
 
|-
 
|-
| '''Status'''        || I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received. May be abandoned, last release in 2006.
+
|  style="background-color:red;"|'''Status'''        || '''DEAD.PACKAGE''' I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received. May be abandoned, last release in 2006.
 
|-
 
|-
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
 
| '''Dependency of''' || Nothing
Line 191: Line 127:
 
In accordance with the Fedora Licensing policy, we have removed some packages which were only available under the Artistic 1.0 license. Specifically:
 
In accordance with the Fedora Licensing policy, we have removed some packages which were only available under the Artistic 1.0 license. Specifically:
 
* d4x
 
* d4x
* perl-Authen-Radius
 
* perl-Class-Data-Accessor
 
 
* perl-Class-Gomor
 
* perl-Class-Gomor
 
* perl-DBIx-SQLite-Simple
 
* perl-DBIx-SQLite-Simple
* perl-Font-TTF
 
* perl-IO-Multiplex
 
 
* perl-Net-Packet
 
* perl-Net-Packet
 +
* perl-Net-Packet-Target
 
* perl-Net-Write
 
* perl-Net-Write
* perl-NetAddr-IP
 
* perl-Razor-Agent
 
* perl-XML-Grove
 
 
* pgadmin3
 
* pgadmin3
* qstat
 
 
* rman
 
* rman
  
Line 210: Line 139:
 
# The FSF says it is not a free license. They say that the text is vague, and that it is open to misinterpretation.
 
# The FSF says it is not a free license. They say that the text is vague, and that it is open to misinterpretation.
 
# The Perl community agrees with this assessment. They went so far as to rewrite the Artistic license to resolve all the identified problems (see http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_2_0).
 
# The Perl community agrees with this assessment. They went so far as to rewrite the Artistic license to resolve all the identified problems (see http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_2_0).
# The Artistic License 1.0 recently went to trial in the US and lost. The judge interpreted it in a very negative way. See: http://lawandlifesiliconvalley.blogspot.com/2007/08/new-open-source-legal-decision-jacobsen.html
 
 
# The OSI has "superseded" the license, recommending strongly that all users move to Artistic 2.0: http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php
 
# The OSI has "superseded" the license, recommending strongly that all users move to Artistic 2.0: http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php
  
Line 218: Line 146:
  
 
----
 
----
[[Category:ProposedFedora10]]
+
[[Category:FeatureAcceptedF10]]

Latest revision as of 14:15, 15 September 2008

Contents

[edit] Artistic 1.0 Removal

[edit] Summary

Remove all packages licensed under only the Artistic 1.0 license before Fedora 10.

[edit] Owner

[edit] Current status

  • Targeted release: Fedora 10
  • Last updated: Mon Sep 15, 2008
  • Percentage of completion: 100%

[edit] Detailed Description

Fedora has some legacy packages which are only available under the Artistic 1.0 license. This license is not a permitted license in Fedora.

Why?

  1. The FSF says it isn't free. They say that the text is vague, and that it is open to misinterpretation.
  2. The perl community (the original authors) agrees with this assessment. They went so far as to rewrite the Artistic license to resolve all the identified problems (see http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_2_0).
  3. The OSI has "superseded" the license, recommending strongly that all users move to Artistic 2.0: http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php

Over the last year, I've tracked down the upstream copyright holders for the majority of these packages, and was able to successfully relicense most of them.

[edit] Benefit to Fedora

Adherence to our licensing policies. Gets Fedora closer to the possibility of a "Free" Spin. Avoids potentially expensive and painful lawsuits.

[edit] Scope

The following Fedora packages are currently Artistic 1.0 only:

[edit] d4x

Maintainer thias
Status DEAD.PACKAGE I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received.
Dependency of Nothing

[edit] perl-Class-Gomor

Maintainer sindrepb
Status DEAD.PACKAGE Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing.
Dependency of perl-Net-Packet , perl-Net-Write , perl-DBIx-SQLite-Simple , perl-Net-Packet-Target

[edit] perl-DBIx-SQLite-Simple

Maintainer sindrepb
Status DEAD.PACKAGE Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
Dependency of Nothing

[edit] perl-Net-Packet

Maintainer sindrepb
Status DEAD.PACKAGE Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
Dependency of Nothing

[edit] perl-Net-Packet-Target

Maintainer sindrepb
Status DEAD.PACKAGE Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
Dependency of Nothing

[edit] perl-Net-Write

Maintainer sindrepb
Status DEAD.PACKAGE Corresponded with upstream by email in 2007, upstream uncomfortable with Artistic 2.0, unwilling to relicense "just for Fedora". Emailed again on Friday July 11, 2008 to see if they are more willing now. Upstream replied on Saturday, July 12, 2008 that they have no intention of relicensing. (Same upstream as perl-Class-Gomor)
Dependency of perl-Net-Packet

[edit] pgadmin3

Maintainer pgadmin3
Status In 2007, upstream agreed to relicense in principle, most contributors were ok with Artistic 2.0, then thread died off. Code is still under Artistic 1.0. Emailed upstream again on Friday, July 11, 2008 to try to restart the process. Upstream is working with the SFLC to try to relicense (confirmed via email on Sat July 12, 2008). Package blocked in F-10, but likely to be revived at some point in the near future, so not killed off entirely.
Dependency of Nothing

[edit] rman

Maintainer jamatos
Status DEAD.PACKAGE I've emailed the upstream authors, last email sent Friday July 11, 2008, no response ever received. May be abandoned, last release in 2006.
Dependency of Nothing

[edit] Test Plan

Realistically, there is no test plan. These packages will be gone from Fedora.

[edit] User Experience

Any users expecting these packages to be in Fedora will experience their absense, however, I suspect most of these packages are not widely used.

[edit] Dependencies

Package dependencies are described above.

[edit] Contingency Plan

We don't pull these items out.

[edit] Documentation

No need, aside from the Release Notes.

[edit] Release Notes

In accordance with the Fedora Licensing policy, we have removed some packages which were only available under the Artistic 1.0 license. Specifically:

  • d4x
  • perl-Class-Gomor
  • perl-DBIx-SQLite-Simple
  • perl-Net-Packet
  • perl-Net-Packet-Target
  • perl-Net-Write
  • pgadmin3
  • rman

We no longer permit code in Fedora under the Artistic 1.0 license for a variety of reasons:

  1. The FSF says it is not a free license. They say that the text is vague, and that it is open to misinterpretation.
  2. The Perl community agrees with this assessment. They went so far as to rewrite the Artistic license to resolve all the identified problems (see http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_2_0).
  3. The OSI has "superseded" the license, recommending strongly that all users move to Artistic 2.0: http://opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license-1.0.php

Fedora has made every effort to track down the upstream copyright holders for these packages, and was either unable to reach them or they were unwilling or unable to relicense.

Please note: Packages which are dual-licensed where one of the licenses is Artistic 1.0 are still permissable in Fedora (as long as the other license is on the "Good Software Licenses" list at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses), only packages which are solely licensed under Artistic 1.0 are no longer acceptable.