Conversation
Notices
-
@kevingranade, @allisonrandal didn't quite say that,but she said those who chose strong #copyleft want it relicensed weak copyleft regularly
Sunday, 19-Jun-11 02:17:21 UTC from web-
Bradley M. Kuhn
Linux Outlaws Podcast
, GNU Affero General Public Licence
, The GNU Lesser General Public License
, Allison Randal
Finally heard !LO w/ @allisonrandal who gives no evidence for assertionj developers of !GPL & !AGPL stuff generally want code !LGPL'd too.
-
@fontana I still have some stuff in subversion on my server, so I had to figure out how to use it again last night.
-
@gomerx git svnimport. Learn to love it.
-
@fontana hg has SVN pull an push capabilities as does git :-)
-
@psquid I've been considering moving to git. I only have a couple things in svn, but they're important. I actually have stuff in CVS still.
-
@gomerx Well, as I said, there's a git command specifically for converting repos: "git svnimport". It is a thing of beauty. :)
-
@ashcrow Git also has full svn import capabilities (i.e., full conversion of repo). Hg, dunno, but I wouldn't be surprised if it does.
-
@psquid Hg has git support (which is also awesome).
-
@speeddefrost Looking at the man page, it looks like it has repo import support for basically _everything_. :O
-
@psquid I need to learn how to run git on my server, but I'll need to learn it eventually anyway. I've got the git book on my Kindle.
-
@gomerx gitosis is easy to set up, i used this: http://ur1.ca/3rbmz
Jeff Has Moved likes this. -
@psquid yup, both do and do good jobs!
-
@bkuhn As someone who almost exclusively uses #git, I'd be interested to know: which features does it lack compared to #subversion?
-
@psquid, the one I just told @fontana, plus the fact #Subversion makes an immutable record. !Git allows commit rewriting.
-
@bkuhn Ah, okay. I don't personally find those to be valuable, but on the other hand, I can somewhat see that they could be useful.
-
@psquid Yeah, that did kinda surprise me too :) The SVN cloning support was as good as it should be.
-
@bkuhn what does svn have that git doesn't? genuine question, not trolling. I only know git, curious to learn about other options :)
-
@fukawi2, please see that I answered that question in previous dents: http://identi.ca/notice/76661249 & http://identi.ca/notice/76661336
-
@bkuhn Thx, didn't see that, only saw the dent you tagged to the Fedora group :)
-
@bkuhn err... what stops anyone from rewriting the commit history in a SVN repository?
-
@kevingranade and how's that different from git commit rewriting?
-
@lxoliva both have measures 2 prevent or limit history rewriting. Svn req's admin access 4some ops+Git has some crypto. @kevingranade @bkuhn
-
@psquid What are the advantages of git svnimport compared to git-svn?
-
@clacke I think git-svn pulls and pushes to/from an svn repo, whereas git svnimport does a complete (irreversible?) conversion.
-
@psquid Yes. What is the advantage of the latter, rather than doing the former and then running with it? Curious if func dup has merits.
-
@psquid going to be so freaking useful when we have to use svn next year >.<
-
@clacke I guess the latter is mainly for if you're certain you want it to be a git repo indefinitely from now on.
-
@reality Well, if you have to push it back to svn afterwards, you should probably use git svn, rather than svnimport.
-
@psquid I suppose burning bridges may have value in itself. Does is do better svn-to-git mapping of branch/merge etc than git-svn might?
-
@psquid thats what i meeant
-
@bkuhn, @kevingranade What? Not sure where you got that...
-
@bkuhn, @kevingranade I generally think the FLOSS world is grouped in "strong copyleft", "strong permissive", and a range between the two.
-
@bkuhn, @kevingranade Strong copylefts would never want their work relicensed as permissive, it would completely undermine their goals.
-
@bkuhn GPLv3 leaves devs with no options for an updated GPL without extra terms. Is a decent copyleft license, but should have new name.
-
@reality In my opinion, the best svn client is bzr.
-
@fontana Really? That's just a little bit surprising.
-
@clacke (didn't find it)
-
@fontana That would make sense. Or really, any prefix to show distinction. The "Douglas General Public License". (No stranger than Affero.)
-
@allisonrandal, !FSF has always said that !GPL would be updated & of course it would have different terms. There was no surprise.
-
@allisonrandal, !LGPL is *not* a strong copyleft. Your statements on !LO were surely inaccurate. You said !GPL authors would happily LGPL.
-
@allisonrandal, I support your right to oppose !GPL & its goals; it's your right of course. But you've leaked those positions into #Harmony.
Jeff Has Moved likes this. -
@allisonrandal,I got it from your !LO interview;You said that those who chose !GPL would be fine with relicense under !LGPL. Go listen to it
-
@bkuhn I take it you just listened to the Harmony episode? :)
-
@allisonrandal, !GPLv2 -only was always an option that !FSF encouraged for those who didn't want to trust the FSF to shepherd the GPL.
-
!GPLv2 §9: "new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns."
-
@clacke Oh right, what would you say makes it better than git-svn? (I haven't tried it yet, but will need to)
-
@bkuhn I agree the distinction is important, though in the range "strong copyleft" to "strong permissive", GPL and LGPL are very close.
-
@reality bzr stores enough metadata to make svn a valid bzr repo in most respects, more adaptation than integration.
-
@bkuhn IIRC, what I was trying to explain at the time was why we wanted a general "copyleft" option in Harmony.
-
@bkuhn Perhaps it's better not to have a general "copyleft" option, and to have projects list specific copyleft licenses instead.
-
@reality example: bzr branches from same svn repo can merge. Modeled faithfully for bzr clients, as closely as possible for svn clients.
-
@allisonrandal, yes, that was the context. Diff copylefts do diff things & they can be weaker or stronger. Lumping them all together is odd.
-
@allisonrandal, IMO your analysis is wrong if you believe the !GPL & !LGPL are "very close". strong != weak. They are v. different by design
-
@bkuhn Which is more different: copyleft vs permissive, or two copylefts with varying definitions of "linking"?
-
@allisonrandal, which is more different: copyleft vs. permissive, or !Faif vs. proprietary. False dichotomies aren't going to help here.
-
@allisonrandal, if you believe that !FSF violated !GPLv2 §9, you should file a class action law suit about it. Otherwise, it's just rhetoric
-
@bkuhn It's completely lawful, just not entirely helpful to free software developers.
-
@allisonrandal,I disagree. !GPLv3 is incredibly helpful to many !FaiF developers,just not all of them & the latter were on notice about this
Rob Myers likes this. -
@allisonrandal,I wasn't speaking purely to lawfulness. You hint that !FSF broke some trust w/ developers. !GPLv2 §9 shows clearly FSF didn't
-
@bkuhn I'm sure I didn't say "all" would be happy to relicense. I've known you too long to make that mistake. :) Maybe I said "some"?
-
@bkuhn The GPLv3 process demonstrated to me that the FSF values their legal principles more highly than anything else.
Ingolf Schaefer likes this. -
@allisonrandal, I think you might be confusing !SFLC w/ !FSF there. FSF values morality of software freedom more highly than anything else.
-
@bkuhn Which has always been true, and a laudable goal. But, I saw more clearly what they were willing to sacrifice along the way.
-
Bradley M. Kuhn
Free Software Foundation
, GNU Affero General Public Licence
, The GNU General Public License
, Allison Randal
@allisonrandal, if anything, the !FSF sacrificed in the opposite direction. Don't forget !AGPL's Affero clause was supposed to be in !GPLv3.
-
@kevingranade Yes, trust in the author of the changes is key.
-
@bkuhn "morality" implies a degree of "manifest destiny" that I'm not comfortable applying to the FSF or any other organization/individual.
-
@kevingranade The most immediately obvious sacrifice was in the disregard for the needs of the kernel developers, and the resulting schism.
-
@kevingranade A longer-term sacrifice is in gradually undermining their own reputation as thought-leaders in software freedom.
-
@kevingranade With appropriate legal steps, they could have upgraded (still can), but choose not to because of GPLv3.
-
@kevingranade (Note that if GPLv2 and GPLv3 were 100% compatible, they could just "modify and redistribute" their own work under GPLv3.)
-
@kevingranade Entirely possible. Would have only required sticking more closely to the terms of GPLv2 (while updating for modern law).
-
@kevingranade Traditionally, GPL *defined* copyleft. GPLv3 introduced ambiguity: "I'm copyleft, but not that kind of copyleft."
Ricardo Dias Marques likes this. -
@kevingranade GPLv3 sets FSF as the thought-leader of a smaller, more radical subset of the software freedom community.
joshix likes this. -
@kevingranade Perhaps "smaller and more radical" is exactly what the FSF wants, but it leaves a bit of a power vacuum in software freedom.
-
@kevingranade GPLv2 definitely needed an update. Some legal ambiguities discovered over the years, and some antiquated language.
-
@allisonrandal, !FSF ceased being the sole definers copyleft when Mitchell released 1st #Mozilla Public License. It's a v.diff weak copyleft
-
@fontana,since you're !LGPLv3's primary author,I defer to your analysis LGPL is closer to permissive than strong copyleft;cc: @allisonrandal
-
@allisonrandal: We must have seen different revision processes and eventual licences. I'd say quite the opposite. :-)
-
@fontana,Agreed;as I said, @allisonrandal has every right to oppose !FSF view of copyleft,but is !disturbing she leads #Harmony w/ that view
-
@bkuhn I don't actually oppose FSF's view of copyleft, I just see wider social and cultural impacts of GPLv3 (my anthropologist background).
-
@bkuhn Also, Harmony doesn't have a leader.
-
@allisonrandal Every group has a leader. If explicit or not, there's *always* a leader. It's human nature.
-
@fontana I see ongoing decisions of projects on whether/when to upgrade, and whether they're compatible with dependencies who already have.
-
@fontana Either phrasing could allow most changes. But, enormous effort went into ensuring Artistic2 was the same terms as Artistic1.
-
@fontana Is your policy that GPLv2 and GPLv3 are compatible? i.e. it's fine for GPLv2 code to link or include GPLv3 code? (Just curiosity.)
-
@fabsh I disagree that every group has a dictator (benevolent or not), but agree group work often falls to a small number of people.
-
@allisonrandal Leader does not mean dictator. Also: Benevolent dictators do not exist. It's a dangerous misnomer.
-
@allisonrandal in fact the term is a joke, not meant to be taken seriously
-
@fontana I sympathize with the confusion, I had the same misunderstanding of SFLC's role in Harmony last year.
-
@fontana But, "janitor of boring infrastructure bits" does not equal "leader".
-
@fontana Agreed that GPLv2-or-later is GPLv3 compatible, both upstream and downstream.
-
@fontana I thought they were, but was later corrected (by them). They did the work that needed to be done, but did not intend to lead.
-
@allisonrandal, how are releases for #Harmony decided if it has no leader? Is there voting? Where's its governance structure documents?
-
@allisonrandal, manifest destiny refers to forceful imposition of a moral doctrine. !GPL is opt-*in*. !FSF's work is *not* manifest destiny!
-
@allisonrandal,Are you a cultural relativist? It'd explain why you believe having a moral code is equivalent to practicing manifest destiny.
-
This talk of "Manifest Destiny" made me think of the #DRI song, which led me to discover they're still touring. Weird: http://ur1.ca/4hrko
-
@dbs, I agree that software projects can work that way. Producing moral documents, though, seems like it needs some structure IMO.
-
@bkuhn Not absolutely. ;) But as an anthropologist, I do have some cultural relativist leanings.
-
@allisonrandal,I once told #ESR, it's impossible to be an anthropologist studying a culture you're part of. ESR freaked out on me about that
-
@bkuhn I do believe that those who give their software away permissively are every bit as "right" as those who give it away copyleft-ly.
-
@bkuhn I wholly agree with that. Anthropology is about being objective, you cant be objective about something you're part of
-
@bkuhn Heh, the great studies of the Nacirema!
-
@allisonrandal, of course I agree w/ you on that. It's those who make proprietary versions of any software who are acting morally wrong IMO.
-
@fontana, this was,BTW,conference where #ESR said he'd take #Torvalds to shooting range to help "ensure all #OpenSource people are gun nuts"
-
@bkuhn So, it's not "wrong" to use permissive licenses, but is "wrong" to exercise the rights they grant? That doesn't make sense.
-
@fontana @allisonrandal makes perf sense to me. all immoral behavior doesn't need to be made illegal. doing so optional pragmatic move.
-
@allisonrandal Plus very different legal landscape and hardware changes making it impossible to retain v2 spirit w/o lots of overhaul for v3
-
@allisonrandal, of course it makes sense,it's just that you don't agree w/ moral position that proprietary software is wrong but !FaiF isn't
-
@allisonrandal, plenty of things are morally wrong IMO that aren't illegal & for various reasons I even don't think they should be illegal.
-
@bkuhn: conversely, some things are illegal and undoubtedly morally right. The two sets are only partly overlapping, I reckon.
-
@carlopiana, I agree completely. Laws approximate morality, they don't define it. I'm surprised @allisonrandal doesn't agree.
-
@bkuhn You're missing the fundamental point that permissive licensing *intentionally* grants the right to make proprietary redistributions.
-
@allisonrandal, & the laws of the USA allow me to drive a car every day, which I also think is morally wrong but shouldn't be illegal.
-
@allisonrandal,whether or not a particular rule permits something w/out penalty has virtually nothing to do with the morality of the action.
-
@allisonrandal, another example: it's morally wrong not to recycle. But recycling is not legally mandated in most jurisdictions.
-
@bkuhn I agree with you. Just a side point: It *is* legally mandated in most of Europe. ;)
-
@bkuhn under what moral code is it wrong not to recycle? I agree its a good thing, but when does not doing a good thing == to a bad thing?
-
@fontana, IMO correct analogy is: "permissive licensing is like a store that sells drinks in plastic bottles but has no ♻ bin on premises."
-
-
@fontana,In other words,permissive licensing doesn't require you to DTRT morally,but doesn't prevent you from doing so,which is what matters
-
@bkuhn I see proprietary software as unfortunate, shortsighted, a lesser business model, limiting to innovation, but not "morally wrong".
-
@allisonrandal, our disagreement on that's established. My point is: it's morally consistent to merely prefer copyleft rather than demand it
-
@bkuhn unless you get into meta levels...
-
@bkuhn I'll think a bit about that. I'm trying to see it from your perspective (cultural relativism), and not quite managing.
-
@allisonrandal, I have a morality of right & wrong. Proprietary software is wrong, but not so wrong it *must* be illegal. Does that help?
-
@bkuhn It just bugs my Spock-like logic to say you accept permissives while rejecting their philosophy. How is that acceptance?
-
@allisonrandal @bkuhn is soooo Kantian, which is soooo not cultural relativist
-
@allisonrandal,I'm not opposed to permissive licenses b/c they grant software freedom. It's just poor strategy since they fail to defend it.
sazius (moved to status.saz.im) likes this. -
@allisonrandal,Putting it YA way: moral imperative is to grant software freedom. How to defend freedom is strategic question,not a moral one
-
@allisonrandal,eg: failure of #Harmony to have an InboundCopyleft=OutboundCopyleft option is horrible strategy, but not necessarily immoral.
-
More generally speaking,I find #Harmony !disturbing b/c it approaches an area wrought w/ moral issues with a completely amoral attitude.
-
@bkuhn You pointed out that there is no generic copyleft strategy that will work for Harmony. It has to be a specific list of licenses.
-
@bkuhn wrought? fraught?
-
@bkuhn I am, BTW, recommending that in the Harmony drafting meeting in 30 mins, based on your feedback.
-
@cwebber Aye, *I'm* being cultural relativist in trying to assess his values within the frame of his own culture rather than my own culture.
-
@allisonrandal Ah, gotcha :)
-
@bkuhn This is among the stupidest things I've ever read. First, it is like saying "write what you don't know." Second, viewed from the...
-
@bkuhn ...persp. of any of the supposed ET alien cultures you spend your nights wet-dreaming abt, Earth has a culture. You can't study it?
-
@bkuhn it could indeed be a moral one, just needs thinking on a level above the normal one to explore the possibility.
-
@bkuhn Rather than saying they don't defend software freedom, why not instead say they leave its defence up to the developer.
-
@bkuhn Plus economic necessity. Both are valid and morally acceptable defences.
-
@kevingranade That's a view, but another view is that the developers involved consider non-copyleft as introducing another freedom.
-
@webmink aren't you (or they) confusing freedom with power? http://fsfla.org/blogs/lxo/pub/freedom-vs-power
Jesús E. Franco Martínez likes this. -
@webmink, issue of "introducing another freedom" w/ permissive licensing has been well debated. @rms & wrote on it 10 yrs ago: ur1.ca/2ai3k
der.hans likes this. -
@bkuhn permissive vs. copyleft is really just an extension of the debate of anarchy vs. democracy
-
Via @bkuhn "I'm not opposed to permissive licenses b/c they grant software freedom. It's just poor strategy since they fail to defend it"
-
@bkuhn heh, funny too how some BSD developers end up getting angry when people do take their code and never open the changes back up
-
@mcgrof, I'm now on public record saying this thing I've said to you before:Some BSD developers practice what I call "copyleft by guilt".
Richard Fontana likes this. -
♻ @bkuhn I'm not opposed to permissive licenses b/c they grant software freedom. It's just poor strategy since they fail to defend it
-
@x1101 Not at all -- the !anarchist side favors #copyleft. You probably mean !capitalism / power versus #freedom.
-
@x1101 No, #copyleft is !anarchist. Copyleft vs. Permissive is #freedom vs. power / !capitalism's "bourgeois liberty" (freedom to exploit)
Rob Myers likes this. -
@lxoliva Only if you take a Stallmanite philosophy as given. I know many people who regard freedom as removed by copyleft.
-
@bkuhn I hate that - I also see if in copyleft-based communities sometimes though.
-
@bkuhn Indeed, it is a natural element in the software freedom dialectic with no universally accepted resolution.
-
@webmink, well, in copyleft communities, those are the legal requirements, so making people feel guilty is irrelevant: it's a © infringement
-
@webmink, It's akin to Libertarian vs. liberal debates that are common in the USA. Many libertarians believe slavery should be permitted too
-
@bkuhn Only if there's someone willing to go litigate. Plenty of people would prefer to just shame the offender.
-
@webmink Shame doesn't work. We can see that with Apple. They are clearly afraid of litigation though so they avoid GPL.
-
@bkuhn Slavery doesn't seem very libertarian to me. That philosophical belief must be heavily modified by US politics?
-
@fabsh Indeed, corporations are immune to shame.
-
@webmink I think it can work if the community is behind it. Apple gets cut too much slack and MS and Oracle just don't care.
-
@webmink I've seen it work with Google in some instances, though. But generally, you are totally right.
-
@webmink They don't recognize it as shame. They would recognize it as bad PR and if it affects business, it can result in change.
-
@webmink those who regard it as such are mistaken; enslaving/controlling others is not freedom, but power
-
@webmink rejecting the difference between freedom and power amounts to rejecting “one's freedom ends where the neighbors' begin”
-
@webmink more often said as "My right to swing my arms around ends exactly at someone else's face"
-
@gabrielsaldana exactly! and not just because I wouldn't want to be controlled, but because it'd be power, not freedom ;-)
-
@lxoliva and what about the freedom to have power?
-
@gabrielsaldana power, being over others, requires very good justification and must be granted voluntarily for legitimacy
-
@gabrielsaldana unless you're speaking of a different kind of power (e.g. electricity), of course ;-)
-
@lxoliva "power is taken, not given" - Nicholai Machiavelli !q
-
@gabrielsaldana there it goes ;-) the logical conclusion is that power is always illegitimate. freedom is key
-
@fabsh Natural reptile behaviour :-) http://webmink.com/essays/reptiles
-
@lxoliva Since I know your mind is made up I decline the opportunity to fight. But thanks for the invitation :-)
-
@silner,Many USA Libertarians believe people should be "free" to sell themselves into slavery if they want & government shouldn't intervene.
-
@silner some fringe beleive everything can be bought and sold in a free market, including your own freedom. Maybe even the market itself...
-
@patrickniedzielski Anarchists aren't stupid; we don't pretend to live in anarchy right now; copyleft is the best we've got cc @tedks
-
@jbeatty Public domain, a relinquishing of state given rights, bypassing the need for a state, seems far more appealing to the anarchist.
-
@patrickniedzielski Public domain favors the corp; anarchists cannot afford to live in a fantasy world. Have you ever even met an anarchist?
-
@jbeatty One. Calm down. Nowhere have I claimed anarchists' beliefs are fantasies, nor that they "pretend". I have met anarchists, yes.
-
@patrickniedzielski an anarchist's allegiance is to freedom; opposition to the state is merely a side effect. Don't confuse us with AnCaps
-
@jbeatty Two. Anarchism is not the same as anticorporationism. Most anarchists believe in the latter, but do not one for the other.
-
@patrickniedzielski anarchocapitalism is not anarchism, way to ignore hundreds of years of theory, fuck Big-L Libertarians
-
@jbeatty One. Calm down. Nowhere have I attacked you. stfu with your attacks on me.
-
@patrickniedzielski slandering anarchists as ignorant idealists who oppose a state for some arbitrary reason is an attack.
-
@jbeatty Where have I called you ignorant? Where have I slandered?
-
@jbeatty Wikipedia says basically the same thing, as does World Book.
-
I'm not in the mood for this Goddamnit
-
@allisonrandal,you said:being unable to use GPL'd code in LGPL'd project (w/out GPL'ing whole) "isn't way developers think" !LO 204 at 37:30
-
@bkuhn Well, I deal with a lot of developers who don't understand why we can't ship GPL/LGPL code under permissive licenses, so yeah.
-
@allisonrandal, but "a lot" doesn't justify the sweeping genarlizations you made. Most developers I talk to can tell diff btw !GPL & !LGPL.
-
@bkuhn Care to quantify that "most"? I still routinely get the most basic imaginable questions about FOSS licenses from seasoned developers.
-
@bkuhn most coders I see talking on the net outside specialist circles can barely tell diff btw a computer and a magic genie: need teaching
-
@webmink "most devs [bkuhn] talks to" != "most devs", I suspect.
-
@webmink,my "most" is surely just as quantified as @allisonrandal's is. I rarely talk to a developer who doesn't know roughly:GPL, LGPL, BSD
-
@dbs, I probably talk to more diversity of developers than most,since my role at #Conservancy has me interacting w/ a wide range of projects
-
Those looking for the continuation of this thread might want to follow into this conversation: http://identi.ca/conversation/74979814
-
All Identi.ca content and data are available under the