Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged for Debian, what is the point of adding another? Especially when it is non-free. Firstly, as it is non-free, it isn't really going into Debian. Secondly, if someone wants to package it, and other people use it, why shouldn't it? It seems every other semi-controversial ITP gets an obligatory why package this when we have X,Y,Z instead? reply, although seemingly never from an ftp-master or mirror maintainer or anyone else who is actually impacted by archive sizes :-( -- Jon Dowland -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
Le jeudi 11 octobre 2007 à 15:01 +0100, Jon Dowland a écrit : It seems every other semi-controversial ITP gets an obligatory why package this when we have X,Y,Z instead? reply, although seemingly never from an ftp-master or mirror maintainer or anyone else who is actually impacted by archive sizes :-( Archive size not so much a concern as archive *quality*. There is trouble maintaining the quality level reasonable for each packages when there are so many packages. -- .''`. : :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code. `. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to `-our own. Resistance is futile. signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
Jon Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It seems every other semi-controversial ITP gets an obligatory why package this when we have X,Y,Z instead? reply, although seemingly never from an ftp-master or mirror maintainer or anyone else who is actually impacted by archive sizes :-( Consider it an expression of increasing resistance designed to make people think twice. I think it's useful even when not enforced. If one is convinced that the package is needed, one can always go ahead anyway, but the resistance provides useful feedback and sometimes identifies packages that are really unnecessary for reasons that the prospective packager didn't realize. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
* Pierre Habouzit: (I don't know anything about Perforce. Perhaps it's really dangerous software. But perhaps it's just non-free.) OTOH I'm always reluctant to see new things enter non-free when there is perfectly suitable alternatives. I mean git, hg, bzr, or even the horrible svn can do what p4 does, or even way better. Neither of them speaks the Perforce protocol. But I understand that you don't always chose the tools you have to use at work. There are a some free software projects that use Perforce. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On 08-Oct-07, 16:15 (CDT), Steinar H. Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Roberto C. S??nchez wrote: Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged for Debian, what is the point of adding another? I don't see the relevance of this argument, really, but if you really think it's a problem: What if someone needed to access an existing Perforce repository? They could download and install the client from Perforce? Steve -- Steve Greenland The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the world. -- seen on the net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On Mon, 2007-10-08 at 14:42 -0700, Tyler MacDonald wrote: Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seems to me that this depends on Perforce. D'oh. (I don't know anything about Perforce. Perhaps it's really dangerous software. But perhaps it's just non-free.) Perforce is an absolutely *excellent* VCS with the unfortunate distinction of being proprietary. SubVersion can do most (but not all) of what it does, albeit 10 times slower. Still, I've migrated all of my stuff over to subversion, because, well, subversion is free. Perforce is free (as in free beer) for open source developers, if you want more than 2 users on one VCS server, you have to sign a contract, get a license, give the perforce people full access to your repo, sign a new contract whenever you server's IP address changes, and renew each year Slightly off topic, but you don't need to give the perforce people access to you repo (unless you really want them to come in a fix something) and you don't need to renew each year (unless you want support from them). signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On Tue, 2007-10-09 at 05:41 +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote: Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Roberto C. S?nchez wrote: Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged for Debian, what is the point of adding another? Especially when it is non-free. How about people use it? There's plenty of installations of perforce; I think making it easier to use Debian with them is within the mandate for non-free. I'd say upload only the client to non-free. We should provide users a way to use their existent preforce servers but we should not encourage new installations of perforce. Sounds like a compromise to me :) Indeed, my primary aim was to make it easy for anyone wanting to run debian in an org that uses perforce (i.e. people like myself). I agree the server package is of less use in this respect, its simply there to make it easy for people to choose debian on the server side as well. Pending the legal conclusions I'll upload just the client package initially. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
Sam Clegg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perforce is an absolutely *excellent* VCS with the unfortunate distinction of being proprietary. SubVersion can do most (but not all) of what it does, albeit 10 times slower. Still, I've migrated all of my stuff over to subversion, because, well, subversion is free. Perforce is free (as in free beer) for open source developers, if you want more than 2 users on one VCS server, you have to sign a contract, get a license, give the perforce people full access to your repo, sign a new contract whenever you server's IP address changes, and renew each year Slightly off topic, but you don't need to give the perforce people access to you repo (unless you really want them to come in a fix something) and you don't need to renew each year (unless you want support from them). You don't need to go through all of that if you buy the product. If you get a free open source developmnet license, they want you to renew every year, and they want an account on your server so they can make sure you've only got open source code on there. - Tyler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged for Debian, what is the point of adding another? I don't see the relevance of this argument, really, but if you really think it's a problem: What if someone needed to access an existing Perforce repository? /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://www.sesse.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 11:15:38PM +0200, Steinar H. Gunderson wrote: On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged for Debian, what is the point of adding another? I don't see the relevance of this argument, really, but if you really think it's a problem: What if someone needed to access an existing Perforce repository? I did not realize that this was only for the client. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Sam Clegg [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Package name: perforce Version : 2007.2-2 Upstream Author : Perforce Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.perforce.com/ * License : proprietary Programming Lang: binary only (with bindings in Perl, Python, etc.) Description : closed source revision control system closed source, centralised source control system akin to CVS and subversion. You'll need a license to run a server with more than two users. Free licenses are granted to open source projects. I'm in talks with perforce to get explicit permission to distribute in non-free. Current license discussions are here: http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/09/msg00184.html My packages are here: http://superduper.net/downloads/debian/ I've created two packages: 'perforce' for the client and 'perforce-server' for the server. The 'perforce-server' package is a 'fat' package that contains many server binaries (since the users license if normally limited to a given version). The server package contains debian-friendly init scripts, etc. -- System Information: Debian Release: lenny/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (1, 'experimental') Architecture: i386 (i686) Kernel: Linux 2.6.22-2-686 (SMP w/2 CPU cores) Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 07:30:09PM +0100, Sam Clegg wrote: Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Sam Clegg [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Package name: perforce Version : 2007.2-2 Upstream Author : Perforce Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] * URL : http://www.perforce.com/ * License : proprietary Programming Lang: binary only (with bindings in Perl, Python, etc.) Description : closed source revision control system Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged for Debian, what is the point of adding another? Especially when it is non-free. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Roberto C. S?nchez wrote: Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged for Debian, what is the point of adding another? Especially when it is non-free. How about people use it? There's plenty of installations of perforce; I think making it easier to use Debian with them is within the mandate for non-free. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 07:52:55PM +, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Roberto C. S?nchez wrote: Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged for Debian, what is the point of adding another? Especially when it is non-free. How about people use it? There's plenty of installations of perforce; s/perforce/windows/ and the sentence is still true ;) I think making it easier to use Debian with them is within the mandate for non-free. There is ways to interact with perforce in debian, in a free way: git-p4 being one of them. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O[EMAIL PROTECTED] OOOhttp://www.madism.org pgp3gEjUKOuoU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
* Pierre Habouzit: How about people use it? There's plenty of installations of perforce; s/perforce/windows/ and the sentence is still true ;) The Windows copyright is pretty restrictive AFAIK. If it weren't, I'm certain we hould ship things like Virtualbox VMs in non-free because there is real demand. And your Microsoft reference is *so* 90s. 8-) I think making it easier to use Debian with them is within the mandate for non-free. There is ways to interact with perforce in debian, in a free way: git-p4 being one of them. | * The import does not require anything from the Perforce client view as | it just uses | p4 print //depot/path/file#revision to get the actual file contents. Seems to me that this depends on Perforce. D'oh. (I don't know anything about Perforce. Perhaps it's really dangerous software. But perhaps it's just non-free.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
Florian Weimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seems to me that this depends on Perforce. D'oh. (I don't know anything about Perforce. Perhaps it's really dangerous software. But perhaps it's just non-free.) Perforce is an absolutely *excellent* VCS with the unfortunate distinction of being proprietary. SubVersion can do most (but not all) of what it does, albeit 10 times slower. Still, I've migrated all of my stuff over to subversion, because, well, subversion is free. Perforce is free (as in free beer) for open source developers, if you want more than 2 users on one VCS server, you have to sign a contract, get a license, give the perforce people full access to your repo, sign a new contract whenever you server's IP address changes, and renew each year - Tyler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 09:32:23PM +, Florian Weimer wrote: * Pierre Habouzit: I think making it easier to use Debian with them is within the mandate for non-free. There is ways to interact with perforce in debian, in a free way: git-p4 being one of them. | * The import does not require anything from the Perforce client view as | it just uses | p4 print //depot/path/file#revision to get the actual file contents. Seems to me that this depends on Perforce. D'oh. heh okay :) (I don't know anything about Perforce. Perhaps it's really dangerous software. But perhaps it's just non-free.) OTOH I'm always reluctant to see new things enter non-free when there is perfectly suitable alternatives. I mean git, hg, bzr, or even the horrible svn can do what p4 does, or even way better. But I understand that you don't always chose the tools you have to use at work. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O[EMAIL PROTECTED] OOOhttp://www.madism.org pgpzQ4mVAf1k5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#445866: ITP: perforce -- closed source revision control system
Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 03:41:21PM -0400, Roberto C. S?nchez wrote: Given the great abundance of revision control systems already packaged for Debian, what is the point of adding another? Especially when it is non-free. How about people use it? There's plenty of installations of perforce; I think making it easier to use Debian with them is within the mandate for non-free. I'd say upload only the client to non-free. We should provide users a way to use their existent preforce servers but we should not encourage new installations of perforce. Sounds like a compromise to me :) Regards, Faidon -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
