Re: trademark policy draft - redux
On Sun, Jan 06, 2013 at 06:26:26PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: Dear all, after having postponed this for way too long, here is the second, hopefully final, iteration of the trademark policy draft. I've discussed with SPI lawyers at SFLC all the comments collected during the past discussion, namely: […] The complete new draft is attached to this mail. Thanks everyone for the extra feedback you've provided. I've now gone ahead and committed a patch to the .wml file generating http://www.debian.org/trademark that contains the last policy draft discussed here, stamping it as Debian Trademark Policy, version 2.0. Similar to previous versions of the policy (published by former DPLs), I consider that a DPL decision on Debian assets, but I'm confident that we've reached a policy which is as consensual as it could be, without jeopardizing our future possibilities to defend our marks. The new text at http://www.debian.org/trademark will be live at the next pulse of website regeneration. Thanks to David Prévot for his feedback on an early draft of my patch for that page. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: authoritative list of DFSG-free licenses
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 08:51:54PM +0100, Joerg Jaspert wrote: Joerg, it would be nice to rebuild it adding the repolist plugin http://ikiwiki.info/plugins/repolist/ , which would add the rel-vcs metadata, making the following work nicely out of the box with mr: $ webcheckout http://ftp-master.debian.org/ I don't see why I need a plugin (and whatever settings) for a one-line change, so I just went and added link rel=vcs-git href=http://ftp-master.debian.org/git/licenses.git; title=licenses.git / to the page.tmpl. It isn't supposed to change location every other day. :) But feel free to get me patches to change it, if you think it should. I'm not set on it. Thanks. webcheckout http://ftp-master.debian.org/; works indeed as a charm now. I haven't found the ikiwiki configuration in Git, so I'm unable to provide a patch for that. You are blind. :) It's all in git, but we don't use a setup file. The ikiwiki foo is in ikiwiki/ and the way we call it from our git hook is documented in README. Oops, sorry :) So yes, there are no excuses to try it out and propose patches, all is needed to test it locally is indeed there (hint hint). Any taker for writing a script that gather the corresponding statistics? [ snip useful tips ] OK, thanks for the pointers. I'll spread a bit the news about this, in case there are volunteers interested in some dak-related hacking to get this done. Technically I would think it ends up somewhere along - volunteers clone from the central place and do their work. - every now and then they ping one of ftp*, to have us review it, merge it (or reject the change) and push it to the central place. That would allow anyone to contribute, while keeping the FTPTeam, with us masters being delegates, the ones who publish it. Similar like policy editing works, IIRC. And discussion around it, happen on IRC and (for a start) debian-...@lists.debian.org. Sound suitable to me. It just lacks one bit, IMHO, where to store pending patches to avoid forgetting about them. Can we overload http://bugs.debian.org/ftp.debian.org (possibly with some specific usertagging) for this? If so, please name the desired usertags / categories, I'll then be happy to submit a first patch ... documenting where to report bugs against :-) Much more interesting is to get it all started, soo - Do we have volunteers? Who wants to? Keep in mind it will start with a heavy load. Which will go down when we got most of the stuff documented, but it will never end. Damn Humans, always get up with new licenses... According to this thread, we got at least two (Ian, MJ, not sure about Charles). After DPL-retiring :-), I'll be happy to help too. I guess the natural next step is subscribing to debian-dak@lists.d.o. Please do, everyone, if you're interested in helping with this. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Validity of DFSG #10
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 06:07:33PM +0530, Vasudev Kamath wrote: So, sure, we could drop it. (Note that this isn't entirely trivial, as it will require a GR with a 3:1 majority, given that the DFSG is one of our foundation documents.) So we would need to start a GR for this process but I'm not sure being not a Debian Developer I can start a GR. Proposed addendum to PP phase, question: can a non Debian project member start a GR? SCNR :) Can you suggest me how I can help in this. Of course I know it is more important to have the valid list of license which we considers DFSG free first but again we are not sure how long it will take us to document this. As it usually happens, getting rid of something is much easier than building something new (possibly its replacement). So, even if I agree that the two aspects are somewhat orthogonal, I personally don't see much of a point in getting rid of DFSG §10 without we have a decent, and better, replacement for it. This is just to say that *I* won't personally lead the effort of getting rid of DFSG §10 until we have a decent (and maintained) list of DFSG-free licenses. Others could do that, if they want to; and anyone could help in phases that don't require Debian membership like discussion, text drafting, etc. Cheers. -- Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . . z...@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o . « the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club » signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: authoritative list of DFSG-free licenses
Le Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 05:15:54PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit : According to this thread, we got at least two (Ian, MJ, not sure about Charles). After DPL-retiring :-), I'll be happy to help too. I guess the natural next step is subscribing to debian-dak@lists.d.o. Please do, everyone, if you're interested in helping with this. Hi all, I am already subscribed on debian-dak@lists.d.o, where I can behold Ansgar Burchardt's impressive work on dak :) For IRC, I would prefer to avoid it, because I am not in the same time zone as the members of the FTP team, and because I have difficulties to follow instant messaging and do something else at the same time. I would be interested to start by documenting the Creative Commons licenses. When I encounter a work under CC BY 2.0, I have a hard time explaining Upstream why it is strictly necessary to upgrade it to 2.5 or more for their work to be distributed in Debian. What are the crucial changes that made CC BY 2.5 Free while CC BY 2.0 is non-Free ? Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130119234147.ga1...@falafel.plessy.net
