Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Piotr Roszatycki]

Message for FTP master:

The current rpmstrap package is based on newer version which has debootstrap 
code removed, so it does not contain any controversial code. Additionaly, the 
author of deboostrap is mentioned in rpmstrap's documentation.

The entry from SVN repo log:

r163 | sam | 2005-09-12 20:16:41 +0200 (Mon, 12 Sep 2005) | 2 lines

Add Branden Robinson to the authors field. See 
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=327081


-- 
 .''`.Piotr Roszatycki
: :' :mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
`. `' mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  `-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Piotr Roszatycki]

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Piotr Roszatycki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


* Package name: rpmstrap
  Version : 0.5
* URL : http://hackers.progeny.com/~sam/rpmstrap/
* License : GPL
  Description : bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

 rpmstrap is a tool for bootstrapping a basic RPM-based system. It is inspired
 by debootstrap, and allows you to build chroots and basic systems from RPM
 sources.
 .
 At present rpmstrap can build basic Fedora Core 2, Fedora Core 3, Fedora Core
 4, Yellowdog 4, CentOS 3, CentOS 4, Mandriva and Scientific Linux systems. It
 also has support for custom RPM-based systems managed by PDK.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:08:04PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> * Package name: rpmstrap
>   Version : 0.5
> * URL : http://hackers.progeny.com/~sam/rpmstrap/
> * License : GPL
>   Description : bootstrap a basic RPM-based system
> 
>  rpmstrap is a tool for bootstrapping a basic RPM-based system. It is inspired
>  by debootstrap, and allows you to build chroots and basic systems from RPM
>  sources.

Looking at the source it seems more "based on" than "inspired by",
particular to "rpmstrap" itself, though the "functions" and "scripts/*"
files sure seem more derivative than just coincidently similar. If
so, it's in violation of debootstrap's license (by not including
debootstrap's copyright text), and it seems fairly rude to relicense it
from debootstrap's BSD-ish license to GPLv2+, not to mention expunging
my name and copyright notice from the source, and for that matter all
references to debootstrap.

Removing the copyright's a license violation, and presumably renders the
program undistributable and unpackagable, afaics.

At least Bastian Blank's cdebootstrap was written from scratch to justify
its different license and lack of recognition. Colour me unimpressed.

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Sam Hart]

On Sun, 2005-09-11 at 20:56 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2005 at 02:08:04PM +0200, Piotr Roszatycki wrote:
> > * Package name: rpmstrap
> >   Version : 0.5
> > * URL : http://hackers.progeny.com/~sam/rpmstrap/
> > * License : GPL
> >   Description : bootstrap a basic RPM-based system
> > 
> >  rpmstrap is a tool for bootstrapping a basic RPM-based system. It is 
> > inspired
> >  by debootstrap, and allows you to build chroots and basic systems from RPM
> >  sources.
> 
> Looking at the source it seems more "based on" than "inspired by",
> particular to "rpmstrap" itself, though the "functions" and "scripts/*"
> files sure seem more derivative than just coincidently similar. If
> so, it's in violation of debootstrap's license (by not including
> debootstrap's copyright text), and it seems fairly rude to relicense it
> from debootstrap's BSD-ish license to GPLv2+, not to mention expunging
> my name and copyright notice from the source, and for that matter all
> references to debootstrap.
> 
> Removing the copyright's a license violation, and presumably renders the
> program undistributable and unpackagable, afaics.
> 
> At least Bastian Blank's cdebootstrap was written from scratch to justify
> its different license and lack of recognition. Colour me unimpressed.

To be completely honest with you, I've not looked much at the
debootstrap code before now. I have tried to mimic debootstrap's
interface without a doubt, but have only done so by *using* debootstrap
rather than snooping in its code. I am astounded that I have been
accused of stealing code or "expunging" any name or copyright
information.

For what it's worth, rpmstrap as it is today is actually based on a tool
developed in house at Progeny. This tool could only bootstrap Fedora
Core 2 at a specific revision. Looking at that code now and comparing it
to what I see inside of debootstrap, the only real similarities I see
are that they both have functions common to /many/ other shell scripts
(usage(), die(), warn(), trace()).

I will have to check the legacy on this tool used internally at Progeny
to ensure nothing came from debootstrap, but to the best of my knowledge
it did not. In fact, looking at this internal tool now, it is only 314
lines of code, 153 of which are lists of FC2 packages, so it doesn't
seem likely to share any common ancestry with debootstrap.

Starting with this internal tool, I aimed to build something that could
bootstrap any other RPM-based systems. Part of my goal was to mimic
debootstrap's functionality as it was a tool I had a lot of respect for.
However, I only mimicked it based upon my usage of debootstrap. Thus, in
my design of rpmstrap I did recreate the following from the design of
debootstrap:

1) Identical command-line options:
I wanted rpmstrap to take the same command line options
as debootstrap. This was more out of convenience because
I already knew the debootstrap options and I didn't want
to have to keep track of two different usages. This was
also because I wanted rpmstrap to be something that
someone could just drop into a tool that already used
debootstrap and it would work without any major
tweaking.

2) Placing of suite scripts inside of a "scripts/*" directory:
I wanted to split out the RPM-suites into their own
suite scripts. Originally, I thought of placing these in
either a directory called "suites/*" or one called
"scripts/*". I'll admit freely that I did a "dpkg-query
-L debootstrap" so I could mimic the directory structure
(remember, I wanted this to be a drop-in replacement).
However, that is not looking at the code, merely the
directory layout. I am reasonably certain that directory
layout is not copyrightable.

3) Making common functions available to suite scripts:
I wanted several functions written to be available to
the suite scripts. I originally place these into a file
called "functions", and was pleased to see that
debootstrap had taken similar logic when I did the
"dpkg-query -L debootstrap" above.

So, in conclusion, I did not copy any code from debootstrap, and to the
best of my knowledge, neither did any other contributors. The goal of
rpmstrap has always been to mimic what debootstrap does, except for
RPM-based systems.

rpmstrap and debootstrap both have similar design goals (and rpmstrap
was designed to have the same interface as debootstrap) so there will
undoubtedly be similarities.

Anthony, I value and respect your input, could you show me examples of
code that you believe was stolen? There is a very remote possibility
that code from contributo

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Sam Hart]

On Mon, 2005-09-12 at 12:12 -0500, Sam Hart wrote:
> For what it's worth, rpmstrap as it is today is actually based on a tool
> developed in house at Progeny. This tool could only bootstrap Fedora
> Core 2 at a specific revision. Looking at that code now and comparing it
> to what I see inside of debootstrap, the only real similarities I see
> are that they both have functions common to /many/ other shell scripts
> (usage(), die(), warn(), trace()).
> 
> I will have to check the legacy on this tool used internally at Progeny
> to ensure nothing came from debootstrap, but to the best of my knowledge
> it did not. In fact, looking at this internal tool now, it is only 314
> lines of code, 153 of which are lists of FC2 packages, so it doesn't
> seem likely to share any common ancestry with debootstrap.

I have just been given permission to post the original internal tool
used at Progeny which rpmstrap is based upon, in case anyone would care
to check the legacy for debootstrap code.

This original tool was also called "rpmstrap" and was written from
scratch by Branden Robinson. It does not contain any code borrowed from
debootstrap.

The first appearance of rpmstrap in the internal Progeny svn is the
following code:
http://hackers.progeny.com/~sam/rpmstrap/legacy/rpmstrap-original

The most current revision of rpmstrap in the same svn is:
http://hackers.progeny.com/~sam/rpmstrap/legacy/rpmstrap

This is the actual base for what is now rpmstrap as I maintain. It is
also why the current rpmstrap is GPLv2.

The one thing I have just realized is that the current rpmstrap script
does not actually have Branden's name in it as an author (although his
name does exist in some of the suite scripts). I will rectify this
shortly and apologize for the oversight.

-- 
'
.O. Sam Hart, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
..OProgeny Linux Systems, Inc
OOO 



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Anthony Towns]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 12:12:31PM -0500, Sam Hart wrote:
> To be completely honest with you, I've not looked much at the
> debootstrap code before now. I have tried to mimic debootstrap's
> interface without a doubt, but have only done so by *using* debootstrap
> rather than snooping in its code. 

It's not "snooping" to look at the code of a free software project.

> For what it's worth, rpmstrap as it is today is actually based on a tool
> developed in house at Progeny. This tool could only bootstrap Fedora
> Core 2 at a specific revision. Looking at that code now and comparing it
> to what I see inside of debootstrap, the only real similarities I see
> are that they both have functions common to /many/ other shell scripts
> (usage(), die(), warn(), trace()).

Looking at rpmstrap-0.1, we see the following code for handling options:

] if [ $# != 0 ] ; then
] while true ; do
] case "$1" in
] --help)
] usage
] exit 0
] ;;
] ...
] esac
] done
] else
] usage_error "You must specify a suite and a target."
] fi

debootstrap uses the exact same code, except to say "usage_err
1 NEEDSUITETARGET" instead of "usage_error" and with two-space
indentation. The usual way to parse arguments is with a `for a in "$@"'
loop, or using getopt -- the above parsing algorithm has the bug that
options can only appear at the beginning of the command line, eg.

rpmstrap-0.1 uses the variable "$JUST_PRINT_RPMS" to track whether to dump
the list of rpms to stdout or not; debootstrap uses "$JUST_PRINT_DEBS".

Compare the usage() functions:

] usage()
] {
] echo "Usage: $PROGNAME [OPTION]...   []"
] echo "Bootstrap RPM-based systems."
] echo
] cat <  [ [

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Branden Robinson]

Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > Looking at the source it seems more "based on" than "inspired by",
> > > particular to "rpmstrap" itself, though the "functions" and "scripts/*"
> > > files sure seem more derivative than just coincidently similar. If
> > > so, it's in violation of debootstrap's license (by not including
> > > debootstrap's copyright text), and it seems fairly rude to relicense it
> > > from debootstrap's BSD-ish license to GPLv2+, not to mention expunging
> > > my name and copyright notice from the source, and for that matter all
> > > references to debootstrap.
> > > 
> > > Removing the copyright's a license violation, and presumably renders the
> > > program undistributable and unpackagable, afaics.
> > > 
> > > At least Bastian Blank's cdebootstrap was written from scratch to
> > > justify its different license and lack of recognition. Colour me
> > > unimpressed.

Sam Hart wrote:
> > For what it's worth, rpmstrap as it is today is actually based on a tool
> > developed in house at Progeny. This tool could only bootstrap Fedora
> > Core 2 at a specific revision. Looking at that code now and comparing it
> > to what I see inside of debootstrap, the only real similarities I see
> > are that they both have functions common to /many/ other shell scripts
> > (usage(), die(), warn(), trace()).

Anthony, I've been using shell functions with these names (and the
expected corresponding behaviors) in shell scripts I write for years
now, so you're probably going to need to accuse me of copyright
infringement in shell-lib.sh[1] in the XFree86 and X.Org packages as well.

> > I will have to check the legacy on this tool used internally at Progeny
> > to ensure nothing came from debootstrap, but to the best of my knowledge
> > it did not. In fact, looking at this internal tool now, it is only 314
> > lines of code, 153 of which are lists of FC2 packages, so it doesn't
> > seem likely to share any common ancestry with debootstrap.
> 
> I have just been given permission to post the original internal tool
> used at Progeny which rpmstrap is based upon, in case anyone would care
> to check the legacy for debootstrap code.
> 
> This original tool was also called "rpmstrap" and was written from
> scratch by Branden Robinson. It does not contain any code borrowed from
> debootstrap.

I assert this to be the case.  I'm easily capable of writing the trivial
shell script that constitutes the original "rpmstrap", and the
modifications I made to it subsequently.

For your edification, I'm attaching the SVN commit log for "rpmstrap" up
to and including my last change to it.  None of this is rocket science.

Oh, what the hell, how about I attach the diff of each commit as well,
making it all the easier to identify the exact spots where I absconded
with debootstrap code, mustache twitching!

> The first appearance of rpmstrap in the internal Progeny svn is the
> following code:
> http://hackers.progeny.com/~sam/rpmstrap/legacy/rpmstrap-original
> 
> The most current revision of rpmstrap in the same svn is:
> http://hackers.progeny.com/~sam/rpmstrap/legacy/rpmstrap
> 
> This is the actual base for what is now rpmstrap as I maintain. It is
> also why the current rpmstrap is GPLv2.
> 
> The one thing I have just realized is that the current rpmstrap script
> does not actually have Branden's name in it as an author (although his
> name does exist in some of the suite scripts). I will rectify this
> shortly and apologize for the oversight.

Well, only if there's any of my original nasty kludge *left*.  I kind of
hope it isn't.  :)  (Okay, you can keep usage()/trace()/warn()/die(),
but as for the rest... :) )

The original rpmstrap I wrote was done in haste, but it was not
plagiarized.  The accusation would be amusing if it weren't so
insulting.

[1] http://necrotic.deadbeast.net/svn/xorg-x11/trunk/debian/shell-lib.sh

(There, trace() is not present, but a similar function, observe(),
is.  Neither function is an example of anything more than highly
trivial and idiomatic shell usage.)

-- 
Branden Robinson  | GPG signed/encrypted mail welcome
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   | 1024D/9C0BCBFB
Progeny Linux Systems | D5F6 D4C9 E25B 3D37 068C
  | 72E8 0F42 191A 9C0B CBFB

r16721 | branden | 2005-02-15 12:06:40 -0500 (Tue, 15 Feb 2005) | 2 lines

Install i386, not i686, version of openssl on x86_64 systems.


r15950 | branden | 2004-10-01 12:22:58 -0500 (Fri, 01 Oct 2004) | 3 lines

Fix erroneous architecture string in x86 glibc package for
x86_64.


r15943 | branden | 2004-09-29 15:35:44 -0500 (Wed, 29 Sep 2004) | 13 lines

Add command-line options -h | --help, -l | --list, and -v |
--verbose.

The new -l | --list feature simply prints the list of required
RPMs and exits.

Stop ha

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Anthony Towns]

On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 04:41:26AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Looking at rpmstrap-0.1, we see the following code for handling options:

Also copied was debootstrap's --arch and --include handling; even
duplicating the bug where you have to say "--arch i386" (with a space)
and "--include=foo,bar" (with an =). There even seems to have been a bug
introduced during the copying; debootstrap has:

]   --include*)
] additional="$(echo $1 | cut -f2 -d"="|tr , " ")"
] shift 1
] ;;
]   --exclude*)
] exclude="$(echo $1 | cut -f2 -d"="|tr , " ")"
] shift 1
] ;;

Someone involved in rpmstrap-0.1 evidently decided using lowercase
variables in some places was unacceptably inconsistent and changed
that to:

]   --include*)
]   ADDITIONAL="$(echo $1 | cut -f2 -d"="|tr , " ")"
]   shift 1
]   ;;
]   --exclude*)
]   ADDITIONAL="$(echo $1 | cut -f2 -d"="|tr , " ")"
]   shift 1
]   ;;

making --exclude work the same as --include, up until rpmstrap-0.4,
where they were changed to INCLUDES and EXCLUDES instead.

rpmstrap-0.1 set an UNPACK_TARBALL variable based on an --unpack-tarball
using the same code as debootstrap; but UNPACK_TARBALL is never actually
used; support for it is only implemented in rpmstrap-0.2.

Cheers,
aj


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Sam Hart]

On Tue, 2005-09-13 at 04:41 +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Looking at rpmstrap-0.1, we see the following code for handling options:

> debootstrap uses the exact same code, except to say "usage_err
> 1 NEEDSUITETARGET" instead of "usage_error" and with two-space
> indentation. The usual way to parse arguments is with a `for a in "$@"'
> loop, or using getopt -- the above parsing algorithm has the bug that
> options can only appear at the beginning of the command line, eg.

I've slightly regretted not using getopt, honestly, however the bug you
point out is in many different shell scripts. This really seems a very
common way for people to parse command line options.

As for the name of the usage error function, yes they are similarly
named, but that was really coincidental I assure you.

> rpmstrap-0.1 uses the variable "$JUST_PRINT_RPMS" to track whether to dump
> the list of rpms to stdout or not; debootstrap uses "$JUST_PRINT_DEBS".

Ah, you're right on that one. The use of that variable was suggested to
me by someone who had used debootstrap for some VPS setups. He
maintained custom debootstrap scripts and desired the ability to do some
similar RPM-based VPS scripts. I'd have to check my mail archives to be
certain I am remembering this correctly, but I believe that was part of
a very early patch when rpmstrap was still living as a small set of
scripts.

> Compare the usage() functions:

> The code that handles the "You must specify a suite and a target." error
> messages looks pretty familiar too, but I've changed it a few times and
> I didn't find an exact match at first glance.

The usage() functions and error messages really should come as no
surprise. I was modeling the output based upon what I was getting from
debootstrap. Like I said, the intention was to reproduce debootstrap's
interface so rpmstrap would be familiar to people who have used
debootstrap before. I would guess that all of the error messages common
to the two of them would have similar wording.

> > I will have to check the legacy on this tool used internally at Progeny
> > to ensure nothing came from debootstrap,
> 
> As opposed to use a license that means it could potentially be incorporated
> into debootstrap or give credit where it seems like it's due, considering

It actually was not my decision to GPLv2 it. I honestly didn't care what
license it was released under. GPLv2 was just what the original base as
written by Branden Robinson was copyrighted under.

> > 1) Identical command-line options:
> > 2) Placing of suite scripts inside of a "scripts/*" directory:
> > 3) Making common functions available to suite scripts:
> 
> that you did seem to copy quite a bit from debootstrap anyway.

No, I did not. Maintaining an identical interface and file layout is not
copying code. Aside from the $JUST_PRINT_RPMs patch (which I will track
down to see what else it may have contained) doing similar things in
command-line option handling and usage() functions which have been done
many times before in other shell scripts does not show copying code.

> Even if you hadn't copied any code whatsoever, isn't a little
> acknowledgement appropriate? It's not as though debootstrap's license
> is particularly onerous.

I maintain that I did not copy any code. If you look at the problem
logically, building an RPM-based bootstrap is quite a bit different from
building a DEB-based bootstrap. In the RPM-world I have to keep track of
a lot of information that you wouldn't need to in the DEB-world because
with DEB you get a more rich set of tools. As an example, in an
RPM-based distribution you have to keep track of installation order and
grouping.

However, I do want to make sure that you and debootstrap get appropriate
acknowledgment. I honestly thought I had given sufficient acknowledgment
by linking from the website and mentioning it in the documentation.

Would adding something like the following to the header of the scripts
(under the authors line) be sufficient?
 * Inspired by and modeled after Anthony Towns' debootstrap (URL).

In all seriousness, I never wanted to /not/ let people know what
rpmstrap was intended to be like debootstrap but for RPM-based
distributions.

-- 
'
.O. Sam Hart, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
..OProgeny Linux Systems, Inc
OOO 



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Steve Langasek]

On Mon, Sep 12, 2005 at 02:19:09PM -0500, Sam Hart wrote:
> It actually was not my decision to GPLv2 it. I honestly didn't care what
> license it was released under. GPLv2 was just what the original base as
> written by Branden Robinson was copyrighted under.

> > > 1) Identical command-line options:
> > > 2) Placing of suite scripts inside of a "scripts/*" directory:
> > > 3) Making common functions available to suite scripts:

> > that you did seem to copy quite a bit from debootstrap anyway.

> No, I did not. Maintaining an identical interface and file layout is not
> copying code.

There are other things that are copyrightable besides code -- in
particular, usage/error messages (depending on their length and number)
are likely to be covered by copyright, and it's pretty implausible that
those would be the same between debootstrap and rpmstrap *without*
direct copying.

-- 
Steve Langasek   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer   to set it on, and I can move the world.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://www.debian.org/


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Sam Hart]

Ok, I went back to the source of the problem. Back in Feb 2005 there 
was some development done in IRC between myself and another 
contributor. This contributor supplied me with some stubbed out 
conditional code that I took as is. This is why things like 
"JUST_PRINT_RPMS" and "ADDITIONAL" could be found in 0.1. I have since 
confronted him on this and he admits that the code was from "an 
ancient version of debootstrap" (his words) and has told me he was 
supplying it as example code never intending me to incorporate it. I 
personally cannot recall the exact exchange (although, if I was really 
motivated enough to look for it, I probably have it logged somewhere) 
but it is irrelevant at any rate.

The patch accounted for 23 lines of code and essentially stubbed out 
several command-line conditionals for which I had planned for but 
which did not yet have any code for.

Not all of this code remained in current rpmstrap svn, however that 
code which did remain has now been replaced. Note that this was around 
23 lines of code out of 4293 (1455 of which is Python code, last I 
checked, there is no Python code in debootstrap) and dealt only with 
command-line conditionals and no actual "meat" of the application 
(as I have stated, bootstrapping an RPM system is quite different 
from bootstrapping a DEB system).

In addition to this, the following has been placed inside the main 
script:
 # Inspired by and modeled after debootstrap by Anthony Towns

Finally, even though my original design goal was to clone the 
interface to debootstrap to provide familiarity to rpmstrap's users, 
and even though saying that cloning such an interface is a "bad thing" 
would make projects such as GNU Nano invalid, I have gone ahead and 
changed /some/ of the interface simply because I don't have the time 
to squabble over such childish things. I will /not/ change the 
command-line options nor anything else that is needed in automation 
because there is no line of reasoning in the world capable of 
convincing me that keeping a compatability with debootstrap in this 
is a "bad thing".

These changes (and possibly others I have forgotten about) will be 
available inside a point release (0.5.1) which I will make later
today.

If there is any further code found in rpmstrap or any other project I 
may be working on, it seems to me that a mature way to deal with it 
would be to contact me directly rather than attacking me in public.
I am actually a very reasonable man, and if any mistake is found it
will not have been out of malice. Colour me unimpressed.

'
.O.
..O 
OOO 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Bug#327081: ITP: rpmstrap -- bootstrap a basic RPM-based system

[Anthony Towns]

On Wed, Sep 14, 2005 at 06:00:07PM +, Sam Hart wrote:
> Ok, I went back to the source of the problem. Back in Feb 2005 there 
> was some development done in IRC between myself and another 
> contributor. [...] I have since 
> confronted him on this and he admits that the code was from "an 
> ancient version of debootstrap" (his words) [...]

So good, we're agreed that debootstrap code has made it's way into
rpmstrap.

> The patch accounted for 23 lines of code and essentially stubbed out 

Well, I count some 70 odd lines that're pretty much an exact match to
debootstrap from earlier this year, so I suspect that isn't all of it.

> Not all of this code remained in current rpmstrap svn, however that 
> code which did remain has now been replaced.

So, if your strategy is really going to be "I shall do whatever it takes
to avoid obeying debootstrap's license" you'll need to keep looking
to work out what the deal is with the rest of the code copied from
debootstrap, and probably go to some effort to make sure that you've
got a clean chain of development.

I've no idea why you'd want to do that, when complying with debootstrap's
license and being able to copy whatever you like is just a matter of
including the copyright notice, but hey.

> Finally, even though my original design goal was to clone the 
> interface to debootstrap to provide familiarity to rpmstrap's users, 
> and even though saying that cloning such an interface is a "bad thing" 

What are you talking about? There's nothing bad about cloning things --
that's the whole _POINT_ of licensing things freely.

> would make projects such as GNU Nano invalid, I have gone ahead and 
> changed /some/ of the interface simply because I don't have the time 
> to squabble over such childish things. 

Well, you're spending a lot of time squabbling instead of just adding
a copyright notice.

> If there is any further code found in rpmstrap or any other project I 
> may be working on, it seems to me that a mature way to deal with it 
> would be to contact me directly rather than attacking me in public.

It seems odd that you're complaining that I mailed in public half a
day after I sent you mail directly. Less odd that you're happy to be in
-devel when you think you're right, and change your mind when you find
you're wrong, but hey. 

Personally, I would've thought it'd be polite to say "hey, we're creating
this rpmstrap tool that's kinda like your debootstrap thing but for rpms,
check it out!" too.

> I am actually a very reasonable man, and if any mistake is found it
> will not have been out of malice. Colour me unimpressed.

"Color", dude. Make the whine your own.

Cheers,
aj



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature