EULA as well: xsane - Debian

This is a discussion on EULA as well: xsane - Debian ; hi everyone, while the EULA topic is already being discussed: there is at least one other package in the debian archive which displays a click-through EULA, namely xsane. could we agree on a policy addition that states that individual packages ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: EULA as well: xsane

  1. EULA as well: xsane

    hi everyone,

    while the EULA topic is already being discussed: there is at least one
    other package in the debian archive which displays a click-through EULA,
    namely xsane. could we agree on a policy addition that states that
    individual packages may not do this, and be over with this nonsense for
    good?

    regards robert

    --
    Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFI0o2fS6AOchRbaWYRAiGmAJ4rssC/ZvnVEvBHIQD29MeGIRnwTwCfdmvw
    j6OXz0L/BTSOdSsqMB0XNVc=
    =sHK5
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  2. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    Robert Lemmen wrote:

    Hi,

    > while the EULA topic is already being discussed: there is at least one
    > other package in the debian archive which displays a click-through EULA,
    > namely xsane.


    The one click-through that went away in 0.995-3?

    JB.

    --
    Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer -

    Public key available on - KeyID: F5D6 5169
    GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  3. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 07:18:52PM +0200, Julien BLACHE wrote:
    > > while the EULA topic is already being discussed: there is at least one
    > > other package in the debian archive which displays a click-through EULA,
    > > namely xsane.

    >
    > The one click-through that went away in 0.995-3?


    yes, i didn't get that it was removed in testing (thanks!)

    still: can we make this a policy item?

    cu robert

    --
    Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFI0pEQS6AOchRbaWYRAhoeAJwOro/BjwLJgstunVoAEOb6t566VwCffKPX
    xK9OqYNBWYg/gWvecZTzGQ4=
    =rBB6
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  4. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    Julien,

    On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 07:18:52PM +0200, Julien BLACHE wrote:
    > The one click-through that went away in 0.995-3?


    If you are unsure of this and have to ask, you can look it up in the
    changelog, maybe.


    Michael


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  5. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    Michael Banck wrote:

    >> The one click-through that went away in 0.995-3?

    >
    > If you are unsure of this and have to ask, you can look it up in the
    > changelog, maybe.


    I'm XSane's maintainer, in case you missed that.

    JB.

    --
    Julien BLACHE - Debian & GNU/Linux Developer -

    Public key available on - KeyID: F5D6 5169
    GPG Fingerprint : 935A 79F1 C8B3 3521 FD62 7CC7 CD61 4FD7 F5D6 5169


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  6. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    * Robert Lemmen:

    > still: can we make this a policy item?


    The GPL version 2 permits it to display copyright notices and warranty
    disclaimers, without being allowed to patch them away. This can be made
    more obnoxious than one-time click-through EULAs, I fear.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  7. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 01:58:03AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
    > * Robert Lemmen:
    > > still: can we make this a policy item?

    >
    > The GPL version 2 permits it to display copyright notices and warranty
    > disclaimers, without being allowed to patch them away. This can be made
    > more obnoxious than one-time click-through EULAs, I fear.


    That doesn't mean we should accept those in our distribution. We can
    make a policy decision that end-users should not have to deal with
    those.

    Just saying, I'm not decided either way.


    Michael


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  8. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    On Fri, September 19, 2008 11:25, Michael Banck wrote:
    > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 01:58:03AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
    >
    >> * Robert Lemmen:
    >>
    >>> still: can we make this a policy item?


    >> The GPL version 2 permits it to display copyright notices and warranty
    >> disclaimers, without being allowed to patch them away. This can be made
    >> more obnoxious than one-time click-through EULAs, I fear.

    >
    > That doesn't mean we should accept those in our distribution. We can
    > make a policy decision that end-users should not have to deal with those.


    In lenny we have none such packages that I know of. How about we start to
    make policy when there's a real problem to be solved, and spend our time
    fixing RC bugs meanwhile?


    Thijs


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  9. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    2008/9/19 Michael Banck :

    >> The GPL version 2 permits it to display copyright notices and warranty
    >> disclaimers, without being allowed to patch them away. This can be made
    >> more obnoxious than one-time click-through EULAs, I fear.

    >
    > That doesn't mean we should accept those in our distribution. We can
    > make a policy decision that end-users should not have to deal with
    > those.


    It makes sense. The same way that we're not allowing GFDL packages
    with invariant sections, we might not want this feature/bug of GPL to
    be used for that either. I would support making such a decision.

    Greetings,
    Miry


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  10. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    * Miriam Ruiz:

    > 2008/9/19 Michael Banck :
    >
    >>> The GPL version 2 permits it to display copyright notices and warranty
    >>> disclaimers, without being allowed to patch them away. This can be made
    >>> more obnoxious than one-time click-through EULAs, I fear.

    >>
    >> That doesn't mean we should accept those in our distribution. We can
    >> make a policy decision that end-users should not have to deal with
    >> those.

    >
    > It makes sense. The same way that we're not allowing GFDL packages
    > with invariant sections, we might not want this feature/bug of GPL to
    > be used for that either. I would support making such a decision.


    I would support it too, provided that it's tied to a policy decision not
    to accept works licensed under the AGPL into main.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  11. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 11:27:44AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
    > In lenny we have none such packages that I know of. How about we start to
    > make policy when there's a real problem to be solved, and spend our time
    > fixing RC bugs meanwhile?


    of course, but the issue came up because of the mozilla change, and
    making such a policy decision at a time when it does not mean reverting
    some big package back to an older version. think of it as a
    regression...

    cu robert

    --
    Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  12. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    about click-through EULAs:

    On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:16:17PM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
    > > It makes sense. The same way that we're not allowing GFDL packages
    > > with invariant sections, we might not want this feature/bug of GPL to
    > > be used for that either. I would support making such a decision.

    >
    > I would support it too, provided that it's tied to a policy decision not
    > to accept works licensed under the AGPL into main.


    please forgive my ignorance, but i don't understand what the AGPL has to
    do with click-through license agreements. could you explain?

    cu robert

    --
    Robert Lemmen http://www.semistable.com

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFI04OCS6AOchRbaWYRApZMAJ9NBCby10UnV6aeVMmMHN iULIUciQCgv+FR
    xZDjSaiiV9Oit9LB6b8/qIE=
    =swQY
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  13. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 11:41:57AM +0100, Robert Lemmen wrote:
    > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 11:27:44AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
    > > In lenny we have none such packages that I know of. How about we start to
    > > make policy when there's a real problem to be solved, and spend our time
    > > fixing RC bugs meanwhile?

    >
    > of course, but the issue came up because of the mozilla change, and
    > making such a policy decision at a time when it does not mean reverting
    > some big package back to an older version. think of it as a
    > regression...


    Except the mozilla change has been caught early in Debian and the EULA
    never showed up to users, with or without mozilla reverting their change.

    Mike


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  14. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    On 2008-09-18 19:19, Robert Lemmen wrote:
    > while the EULA topic is already being discussed:


    Where is it already discussed? At least not on d-d, as far as I can
    see/find...

    Thanks,

    Johannes

    NB: Google finds only some ubuntu discussions for me...


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

    iEYEARECAAYFAkjTjlYACgkQC1NzPRl9qEUWRACeLjPeo1gdhr 73lKPMAaPjuNwp
    wN0AmgLuDsFjD9srW7fZ8887M9Yffbzw
    =UgBi
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  15. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    "Thijs Kinkhorst" writes:
    > On Fri, September 19, 2008 11:25, Michael Banck wrote:
    >> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 01:58:03AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:

    >
    >>> The GPL version 2 permits it to display copyright notices and warranty
    >>> disclaimers, without being allowed to patch them away. This can be
    >>> made more obnoxious than one-time click-through EULAs, I fear.


    >> That doesn't mean we should accept those in our distribution. We can
    >> make a policy decision that end-users should not have to deal with
    >> those.


    > In lenny we have none such packages that I know of. How about we start
    > to make policy when there's a real problem to be solved, and spend our
    > time fixing RC bugs meanwhile?


    Uh, I can name several that use that aspect of the GPL just off the top of
    my head. (bc and Emacs, for example.)

    --
    Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  16. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    On Friday 19 September 2008 20:31, Russ Allbery wrote:
    > > In lenny we have none such packages that I know of. How about we start
    > > to make policy when there's a real problem to be solved, and spend our
    > > time fixing RC bugs meanwhile?

    >
    > Uh, I can name several that use that aspect of the GPL just off the top of
    > my head. *(bc and Emacs, for example.)


    Perhaps I interpreted the original posters different than you did, namely
    something that needs explicit action to acknowledge.


    Thijs


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  17. Re: EULA as well: xsane

    * Russ Allbery:

    >> In lenny we have none such packages that I know of. How about we start
    >> to make policy when there's a real problem to be solved, and spend our
    >> time fixing RC bugs meanwhile?

    >
    > Uh, I can name several that use that aspect of the GPL just off the top of
    > my head. (bc and Emacs, for example.)


    I think this was lost for both programs in the transition to GPL version
    3. The currently displayed message is not an "Appropriate Legal Notice"
    in the sense of section of 0 because neither message states that you may
    convey the program under the GPL version 3 (though Emacs in TTY mode is
    pretty close).


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

+ Reply to Thread