View previous topic :: View next topic |
Should x11-wm/ion3 be removed from the tree? |
yes |
|
71% |
[ 66 ] |
no |
|
28% |
[ 26 ] |
|
Total Votes : 92 |
|
Author |
Message |
mabi Retired Dev
Joined: 20 Aug 2005 Posts: 10 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 3:55 pm Post subject: x11-wm/ion3's future |
|
|
Hi folks.
On the gentoo-dev mailing list there's been a http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/49030 RFC on the license change made to the ion-3 package.
This thread quickly had calls for the entire removal of ion-3 from our tree. As this is a serious step, i'd like to get a broader opinion by involving gentoo's userbase. The question is: Should gentoo carry ion-3 in the future?
Bits of background, so you're not voting out of the blue:
Several people have called the new license (contained in the link above) unacceptable and totally outragous. Debian and Archlinux have declared the license not compatible with their policy and intend to fork or abondon ion-3. I've an ebuild for the just released ion-3rc-20070506 on my hard drive, which conforms to the newly added license. I can't guarantee that gentoo will meet the license in the future.
A few more links, already contained in the message referenced above and in the following messages:
https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/ion-general/2007-May/002013.html
https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/ion-general/2007-April/001959.html
http://archlinux.org/pipermail/tur-users/2007-April/004634.html
http://womble.decadent.org.uk/blog/renaming-of-ion3
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?p=69522
This poll is open for 14 days because, conforming to the new license, we have to provide an updated version within 28 days, so it's gotta be a quick decision.
So far, we have 10 developers in favour of "yes", 1 developers in favour of "no". Now it's your turn _________________ Help! Signature ran away! Reward offered. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
xanas3712 Guru
Joined: 15 Oct 2004 Posts: 455
|
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think from reading the ML responses this guy sounds like a pain to work with. I understand the decision either way. I'm not personally using it, I guess I should try it out while it's in portage to see if it's worth all the hassle.
EDIT: seems reasonably useful to me, never used a purely tiling WM before but I can see why someone would just from using it 5 minutes. That said, If the majority of devs are for removal so am I, it doesn't seem that special, and it's not like no one using gentoo can compile from source or write their own ebuild for it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lk n00b
Joined: 13 May 2007 Posts: 1
|
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have voted for 'no'. Renaming ion3 to the name Debian will use should be enough, imho.
And moreover i really like my ion3 ;) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vonr Guru
Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 300
|
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 10:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This seems like a big hassle to me, as the developer's clauses, or rather demands make it quite hard for distros to maintain it. Really, the 'update within x days' thing is retarded. Dump it and let users (or lusers, as the developer likes to call them on the ion3 mailing list) put it in their overlay.
Also, I like vapier's suggestion for the package.mask entry:
Quote: | # upstream is braindead, ask them to get a transplant |
Indeed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
krigav Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 10 Nov 2005 Posts: 121
|
Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Remove it!
I think that some people really don't understand what the whole open source thing is about _________________ There are no dumb questions, just dumb answers. So please help users that are new to linux/gentoo by answering unanswered questions. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paapaa l33t
Joined: 14 Aug 2005 Posts: 955 Location: Finland
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
wildhorse Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 16 Mar 2006 Posts: 149 Location: Estados Unidos De América
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
The USPTO lists ION3 as trademark of Centric Group, filed 21.12.2004. I have not searched for any EU trademark or anywhere else. But maybe with all the publicity raised by the author, it could be that the application will be renamed anyway. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ColdWind Retired Dev
Joined: 08 Dec 2005 Posts: 119 Location: Valencia, Spain
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Voted yes.
If all major distributions punt this package, maybe upstream changes its licenses to something sane.
Right now, I'd vote to move ion3 to an overlay and put the debianish-fork on the tree. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mitschel Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 21 Jan 2005 Posts: 138 Location: Germany
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How many of you voted yes and use ion3 as well? I like ion a lot and use it for more than 2 years now.
I can see where your problem with the developer is, but as long as there is no true alternative, I vote NO! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ColdWind Retired Dev
Joined: 08 Dec 2005 Posts: 119 Location: Valencia, Spain
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mitschel wrote: | How many of you voted yes and use ion3 as well? I like ion a lot and use it for more than 2 years now.
I can see where your problem with the developer is, but as long as there is no true alternative, I vote NO! |
I voted yes and I use ion3.
It's an excellent piece of software, but it doesn't mean that its author can enforce such stupid rules to package mantainers. As said in gentoo-devel ML, the "28-days clause" is waaay more against freedom than "closed source software", it's not about "pure free software", it's about an abusive and non-sense clause.
That's a pain for developers. But we, the users, have also problems with the "no patches clause", |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paapaa l33t
Joined: 14 Aug 2005 Posts: 955 Location: Finland
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And all this crap because he doesn't want people to use anti-aliased fonts. Goes beyond my understanding. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Naib Watchman
Joined: 21 May 2004 Posts: 6051 Location: Removed by Neddy
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
freeze it at whatever was the last version that didn't go draconian. Or did the new licence get put on all versions? _________________
Quote: | Removed by Chiitoo |
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ch05en n00b
Joined: 11 May 2004 Posts: 3
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 9:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I use it and I would like to keep on using it.
I would like to see it forked at the last sane license. Look at Xorg/XFree86 now... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ColdWind Retired Dev
Joined: 08 Dec 2005 Posts: 119 Location: Valencia, Spain
|
Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Naib wrote: | freeze it at whatever was the last version that didn't go draconian. Or did the new licence get put on all versions? |
It's simpler. License is LGPL so it can't be changed. The code is free, but the names "Ion" and "Ion3" isn't (and even this is questionable because it's not clear that the author has actually a registered trademark). It'd be enough if someone forks it changing its name (Debian is on the way). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Skymotz n00b
Joined: 09 Sep 2006 Posts: 36
|
Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
fork and forget(the original). like
fire and forget... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
_pF_ Apprentice
Joined: 22 Apr 2004 Posts: 195 Location: Central London
|
Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's an normative and political reaction here against the ion3 developer who doesn't want his creation to be patched ultimately to be like Gnome or KDE or others on that over-trodden and abortive path. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ch05en n00b
Joined: 11 May 2004 Posts: 3
|
Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
_pF_ wrote: | There's an normative and political reaction here against the ion3 developer who doesn't want his creation to be patched ultimately to be like Gnome or KDE or others on that over-trodden and abortive path. |
I detest what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. --Voltaire
s/say/do/g
It's free. You can't stop people doing what they want to it, and neither should you be able to. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mikegpitt Advocate
Joined: 22 May 2004 Posts: 3224
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was all ready to vote no to keep it in portage, until I actually read the new license. Most of it seems fine... the new branding stuff sounds like Mozilla's take on their copyrights... Some points get a little nit-picky, but not terrible. However, the floor drops open with this little clause:
Quote: | Distributions: For example, suppose an aggregate distribution of software
provides a `installpkg` command for installing packages. Then the action
`installpkg ion3` (resp. `installpkg ion`) should always install the
latest release of Ion3 (resp. the latest stable release), online
connectivity provided. | How can they possibly expect distro's to follow this? Gentoo would need to always push out "stable" releases whenever ion feels like making one. "Stable" is not stable until it has been tested by gentoo for some time, which is why unless you run ~x86 your software will always be slightly out of date.
I would remove ion immediately. Ion is not the most popular wm, so a mass distro pull may make them rethink their license...
Last edited by mikegpitt on Wed May 16, 2007 9:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
vonr Guru
Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 300
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mitschel wrote: | How many of you voted yes and use ion3 as well? I like ion a lot and use it for more than 2 years now.
I can see where your problem with the developer is, but as long as there is no true alternative, I vote NO! |
Whether one is using ion3 or not is not really relevant with regard to the package's retarded licensing scheme. Besides, this is not about Gentoo prohibiting you to install ion3. It's about whether Gentoo should distribute a package with an "upgrade within x days, or else"-statement in its license. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
_pF_ Apprentice
Joined: 22 Apr 2004 Posts: 195 Location: Central London
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 4:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
vonr wrote: | Whether one is using ion3 or not is not really relevant |
Pragmatically it is relevant, because that those that don't use ion3 could not care less if it goes or stays and can freely exercise their political prejudices. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
_pF_ Apprentice
Joined: 22 Apr 2004 Posts: 195 Location: Central London
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ch05en wrote: | You can't stop people doing what they want to it, and neither should you be able to. |
Do what you like, but don't disrespect ion3's creator by weaselly calling your own abortion "ion3" too if it greatly differs or diverges from the ion3 philosophy. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
xanas3712 Guru
Joined: 15 Oct 2004 Posts: 455
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When someone considers others modifying their software to be "disrespect" or "weaselly" they really should consider doing something other than open source software. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bruzzler n00b
Joined: 08 Oct 2003 Posts: 70
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, as someone heavily using ion3 i definitely vote for no. Gentoo is about diversity, if the guy wants an elog message saying don't come bugging me if something goes wrong, that's fine. The gentoo forums have been proven invaluable for solving problems with gentoo, this guy i think doesn't even have a forum for ion3. So all the "support" was imho done within gentoo forums.
Isn't all this kinda similar to the gaim/pidgin issue? Every time I install one of these, I see a message that warns about complain to gentoo, not the original devs.
It would be nice if this package would be kept because there is user demand for it, not removed because people who don't use it are pissed with license changes.
-Bernhard |
|
Back to top |
|
|
xanas3712 Guru
Joined: 15 Oct 2004 Posts: 455
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If that were all he were asking for I think this wouldn't have come up. But it's not. Read the license changes yourself and read the ML, this guy sounds like a huge PITA. I don't blame the devs for not wanting to deal with him. And it's not like you can't use ion3 because it's not in portage. You can build from source (easy) or make your own ebuild (also easy). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rokstar83 Guru
Joined: 09 Apr 2005 Posts: 423 Location: MD
|
Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I say yes and let the overlays figure it out. He already gave the Arch devs a headache, I don't see any reason to want the gentoo devs to possibly getting the same thing down the road. That being said, I really like being asked.
OT: I don't think I have ever heard someone so passionate about fonts. I couldn't figure out which he had more issues with, blurry fonts or the FOSS "herd". |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|