Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
On Oct 23, 2003, at 3:17 AM, Stuart Ballard wrote: Andrew Haley wrote: Where is this software? I haven't found it yet, but see postings from Brian Jones on this list where he indicates it's in OMG's FTP area (which I still can't find linked from their site). I guess that you could argue that since the problematic software is almost impossible to find from the link, it isn't a link to non-free software, but it *claims* to be such a link, and it's certainly a *reference* to non-free software - after reading that part of Classpath's homepage, it's quite possible that someone would independently search for OMG's implementation of these packages under the impression that they were Free. As far as I know, the OMG doesn't make any software - just specifications. The public classes in org.omg are automatically generated from CORBA interface definition language (IDL) files by an IDL-to-Java compiler which is specific to each ORB implementation (although I think the actual IDL-to-java mapping is standardized these days, such that code compiled for one ORB will work on another, there would still be differences in the glue code generated for various ORBs). So, all there is to download on the omg site is likely 1) specification documents, and 2) the IDL files. The interfaces don't become software until you implement them - ie write an ORB implementation. IMO the link is not to non-free software: there is no software, so there is no problem. If you're trying to say we shouldn't link to or implement a non-free spec, well, Java is a non free spec in that sense isn't it? Regards Bryce. ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Incidentally, the link for the jgss package is also misleading, as the RFC doesn't appear to contain any implementation of the package in question (I scanned all the way to the end, the only source code was examples of usage) and even if it did, the license on the RFC is not free (it does not allow modification of the RFC itself, although certain kinds of derived works are permitted). Both of the links are apparently misleading. Each points to standards group or specification. The RFC contains better javadoc than we'll ever have concerning each interface, class, and method since you indicate that text is non-free. Chapter 6 should allow someone to pretty easily create the 3 interfaces and 5 classes, some of which are abstract. Brian -- Brian Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Bryce McKinlay [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As far as I know, the OMG doesn't make any software - just specifications. Since I'm allowed, the javartf Source.zip is now online at http://www.haphazard.org/~cbj/classpath/javartf/Source.zip. Even so, the license makes it impractical for the project. Brian -- Brian Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Brian Jones wrote: I don't know if the FSF has characterized the OMG license as non-free yet. We can't include it but we're certainly free to point people at it. It's called 'javartf' and I still have a copy of it if someone wants it. I couldn't get into the ftp site just now myself. Surely if it doesn't allow modification there's not much doubt that it's non-free? And there was a somewhat-public dispute between the GNU Ghostscript team and the GNU Project leadership (specifically RMS) over the fact that GNU Ghostscript pointed people to Aladdin Ghostscript which is non-free - last I heard, GNU Ghostscript was no longer part of the GNU project (although the split was amicable) because they were unwilling to remove all references to the non-free project. So I'm fairly sure that the rule against pointing people to non-free code is enforced strictly on software that is part of the GNU project. Stuart. -- Stuart Ballard, Senior Web Developer FASTNET - Web Solutions (215) 283-2300, ext. 126 www.fast.net ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Hi, If software that is non-free is software that is not part of the GNU project, then Linux is non-free, and someone has somewhere defined free as being GNU. If you disallow links to software that itself provides links to non-free software, you are effectively trying to create your own separate internet where http://www.microsoft.com is illegal (as well it should be, you may say :). Ricky. And there was a somewhat-public dispute between the GNU Ghostscript team and the GNU Project leadership (specifically RMS) over the fact that GNU Ghostscript pointed people to Aladdin Ghostscript which is non-free - last I heard, GNU Ghostscript was no longer part of the GNU project (although the split was amicable) because they were unwilling to remove all references to the non-free project. So I'm fairly sure that the rule against pointing people to non-free code is enforced strictly on software that is part of the GNU project. -- Sin has many tools, but a lie is the handle which fits them all. ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Ricky Clarkson writes: If software that is non-free is software that is not part of the GNU project, False premise. then Linux is non-free, and someone has somewhere defined free as being GNU. Incorrect conclusion. Please see The Free Software Definition, http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html. If you disallow links to software that itself provides links to non-free software, you are effectively trying to create your own separate internet where http://www.microsoft.com is illegal (as well it should be, you may say :). FSF pages don't link to unfree software projects. It seems that OMG is not be an unfree software project, because Implementations of the OMG specifications - such as Object Request Brokers, IDL compilers, and UML-based modeling tools - are not produced by OMG. They are, instead, produced by software vendors or suppliers... Andrew. ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Andrew Haley wrote: FSF pages don't link to unfree software projects. It seems that OMG is not be an unfree software project, because Implementations of the OMG specifications - such as Object Request Brokers, IDL compilers, and UML-based modeling tools - are not produced by OMG. They are, instead, produced by software vendors or suppliers... But the link is provided specifically to get some software that *is* produced by the OMG, and is non-free. I see three distinct issues here: 1) The link doesn't actually take you to a place where you can get the software in question, so it's pretty useless as a link anyway. 2) The link is in a section labelled providers for free core packages, but the software in question is not free. You could argue that free in this context means zero-cost, but on a GNU project such usage is at best VERY ambiguous and at worst outright misleading. 3) GNU projects aren't supposed to link to non-free software, so the link shouldn't exist in the first place. A link to OMG *could* be legitimate, if it was in the context of the people who define the CORBA specification, including the org.omg packages. But even though the OMG is not in itself a non-free software project, I can't see how go to the OMG to get this software, when the software in question is non-free, is not a link to non-free software. To fix 3, the link must be removed entirely. If for some reason 3 doesn't need to be fixed (eg I'm misinterpreting GNU project policy), at least 1 and 2 should be. Stuart. -- Stuart Ballard, Senior Web Developer FASTNET - Web Solutions (215) 283-2300, ext. 126 www.fast.net ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Stuart Ballard writes: Andrew Haley wrote: FSF pages don't link to unfree software projects. It seems that OMG is not be an unfree software project, because Implementations of the OMG specifications - such as Object Request Brokers, IDL compilers, and UML-based modeling tools - are not produced by OMG. They are, instead, produced by software vendors or suppliers... But the link is provided specifically to get some software that *is* produced by the OMG, and is non-free. Where is this software? I see three distinct issues here: 1) The link doesn't actually take you to a place where you can get the software in question, so it's pretty useless as a link anyway. 2) The link is in a section labelled providers for free core packages, but the software in question is not free. You could argue that free in this context means zero-cost, but on a GNU project such usage is at best VERY ambiguous and at worst outright misleading. Where is this link? 3) GNU projects aren't supposed to link to non-free software, so the link shouldn't exist in the first place. A link to OMG *could* be legitimate, if it was in the context of the people who define the CORBA specification, including the org.omg packages. But even though the OMG is not in itself a non-free software project, I can't see how go to the OMG to get this software, when the software in question is non-free, is not a link to non-free software. To fix 3, the link must be removed entirely. If for some reason 3 doesn't need to be fixed (eg I'm misinterpreting GNU project policy), at least 1 and 2 should be. If there is a pointer to unfree software it must, per GNU rules, be removed. But I've failed to find it, and I did try. Andrew. ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Hi, To fix 3, the link must be removed entirely. If for some reason 3 doesn't need to be fixed (eg I'm misinterpreting GNU project policy), at least 1 and 2 should be. I think you are right. It is not a good idea to provide links to software of which we cannot (currently) guarantee that it is Free Software. Could you provide a patch (source is in CVS module classpath under docs/www.gnu.org). Brian, are you still in contact with the OMG people about this? Or do you have contact information which I could use to discuss this issue with them. Cheers, Mark ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Mark Wielaard wrote: I think you are right. It is not a good idea to provide links to software of which we cannot (currently) guarantee that it is Free Software. Could you provide a patch (source is in CVS module classpath under docs/www.gnu.org). Sure, I'll try to do this in the next couple of days. Incidentally, the link for the jgss package is also misleading, as the RFC doesn't appear to contain any implementation of the package in question (I scanned all the way to the end, the only source code was examples of usage) and even if it did, the license on the RFC is not free (it does not allow modification of the RFC itself, although certain kinds of derived works are permitted). (Note that I'm not suggesting that that would prohibit linking to the RFC in general, as the RFC is not software - just that if software source code *were* included in the RFC, that software would not be free). Should my patch remove that link as well? Stuart. -- Stuart Ballard, Senior Web Developer FASTNET - Web Solutions (215) 283-2300, ext. 126 www.fast.net ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mark Wielaard wrote: I think you are right. It is not a good idea to provide links to software of which we cannot (currently) guarantee that it is Free Software. Could you provide a patch (source is in CVS module classpath under docs/www.gnu.org). Sure, I'll try to do this in the next couple of days. Incidentally, the link for the jgss package is also misleading, as the RFC doesn't appear to contain any implementation of the package in question (I scanned all the way to the end, the only source code was examples of usage) and even if it did, the license on the RFC is not free (it does not allow modification of the RFC itself, although certain kinds of derived works are permitted). (Note that I'm not suggesting that that would prohibit linking to the RFC in general, as the RFC is not software - just that if software source code *were* included in the RFC, that software would not be free). Should my patch remove that link as well? This sort of religious zealotry is not helpful. People wishing to implement free versions should know where to go for the standard, the RFC, etc. If it is not possible to link in this context then the FSF web server is useless and I'll have to consider moving http://www.classpath.org/ elsewhere. Brian -- Brian Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Stuart == Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Stuart Then isn't Classpath violating GNU project policy by advertising Stuart non-free software on its homepage? I guess so. There's also JacORB to link to. I think we had one of these running with libgcj a long time ago. I haven't tried recently. Tom ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
The LGPL has a rather interesting point in paragraph 6a. where they state that it is obviously possible to change the code, but It is understood that the user who changes the contents of definitions files in the Library will not necessarily be able to recompile the application to use the modified definitions. I think this bit is not in the GPL (as every piece of code is released under the GLP). This is obviously common sense. The same holds for any implementation of a protocol (even the GPLed ones) that everything can be changed, but nobody would seriously expect them to work afterwards. Would you consider the implementation of a standard or a protocol (which cannot change freely) to violate the GPL? I do not know what the OMG licences doens't allow to do (I couldn't find the implementatio either). -Patrik Patrik Reali http://www.reali.ch/~patrik/ http://www.oberon.ethz.ch/jaos - Original Message - From: Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Brian Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: GNU Classpath [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 3:40 PM Subject: Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage Brian Jones wrote: Basically they will never be free to modify because the entire point of the OMG standard is these interfaces DO NOT CHANGE or change only as the standard evolves at the whim of the standards body. The GPL doesn't allow compatibility with licenses that do not permit modification. Then isn't Classpath violating GNU project policy by advertising non-free software on its homepage? Stuart. -- Stuart Ballard, Senior Web Developer FASTNET - Web Solutions (215) 283-2300, ext. 126 www.fast.net ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Stuart Ballard wrote: b) If they are free but aren't GPL-compatible, shouldn't there be a prominent warning because (if I understand the issues correctly) that would make anything that's simultaneously a derived work of Classpath and the org.omg packages completely unredistributable? I don't think so. Classpath uses GPL+exception and can be linked with proprietary applications. So someone could almost certainly distribute Classpath + org.omg. -- --Per Bothner [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://per.bothner.com/ ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Per Bothner wrote: I don't think so. Classpath uses GPL+exception and can be linked with proprietary applications. So someone could almost certainly distribute Classpath + org.omg. You're right. I should have said Free but aren't GPL+exception-compatible. I'm not sure whether such a thing is possible - if not, obviously the point is moot and we're just left with free or not. Stuart. -- Stuart Ballard, Senior Web Developer FASTNET - Web Solutions (215) 283-2300, ext. 126 www.fast.net ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
Re: org.omg link on Classpath homepage
Stuart Ballard [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: There is a link to http://www.omg.org/ on Classpath's homepage, referencing it as a provider for free core packages for the org.omg packages. I have a few questions about this: 1) I can't actually find any downloadable implementation of the org.omg packages in the omg site. It might be helpful to provide a more direct link to exactly where the code can be found. They are on the ftp site, probably not obvious. b) If they are free but aren't GPL-compatible, shouldn't there be a prominent warning because (if I understand the issues correctly) that would make anything that's simultaneously a derived work of Classpath and the org.omg packages completely unredistributable? Basically they will never be free to modify because the entire point of the OMG standard is these interfaces DO NOT CHANGE or change only as the standard evolves at the whim of the standards body. The GPL doesn't allow compatibility with licenses that do not permit modification. All of that said, I pursued getting the OMG responsible people to change the license and I think they saw why we needed this and at least in some sense were sympathetic but the overriding concern is that of interoperability and hence there was no change. It doesn't mean that going back to them now couldn't change the appropriate minds just that I didn't get very far except that it was on the agenda for one of the quarterly meetings as far as I know and I never got another response. Brian -- Brian Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
