Re: [Distutils] Call for information - What assumptions can I make about Unix users' access to Windows?
On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 10:45 +, Paul Moore wrote: On 7 November 2014 15:46, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote: To that end, I'd like to get an idea of what sort of access to Windows a typical Unix developer would have. Thanks to all who contributed to this thread. Based on the feedback, I think it's going to be useful to provide two options. First of all, an EC2 AMI that can be used by people without access to a local Windows system. While other cloud providers are a possibility, EC2 provides a free tier (for the first year) and is well-known, so it's probably the easiest to get started with (at least it was for me!) Also, I will provide a script that can be used to automatically build the environment on a newly-installed machine. The idea is that you can use this on a Windows VM (something that a number of people have said they have access to). The script may be usable on an existing machine, but it's hard to make it robust, as there are too many failure modes to consider (software already installed, configuration and/or permission differences, etc). So while such use may be possible, I probably won't consider it as supported. Thanks Paul for going through this! Looking forward to the link/code. holger Thanks again, Paul ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - distutils-...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [Distutils] Call for information - What assumptions can I make about Unix users' access to Windows?
On 20 November 2014 13:31, holger krekel hol...@merlinux.eu wrote: Thanks Paul for going through this! Looking forward to the link/code. Cheers - it's not forgotten, but real life's being a nuisance, so it's on the back burner for a short while. I'll try to get something done in a few weeks. Paul -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: [Distutils] Call for information - What assumptions can I make about Unix users' access to Windows?
Ben Finney wrote: Steve Dower steve.do...@microsoft.com writes: Ben Finney wrote: The restrictions of the license terms make MS Windows an unacceptable risk on any machine I'm responsible for. Just out of interest, which restrictions would those be? It has been a long time since I bothered to read any of the numerous license texts from Microsoft, so I can't cite specific clauses. From memory, unacceptable restrictions include: * Restricting the instance to specific hardware, instead of leaving it up to the recipient to run the work they paid for on any hardware they choose. If by specific hardware you mean the one-license-per-user-per-machine rule, you probably want to consider Windows Server, which has a more flexible license in this respect (or maybe not - it might just allow multiple users on one license/machine. I haven't checked this). * Forbidding reverse-engineering of the OS to see how it behaves. Yeah, I doubt that restriction is moving anywhere. It's standard for closed-source software, and as I understand it's intended to legally protect trade secrets and patents (i.e. we tried our hardest to keep this a trade secret). I've never heard of anyone being pursued for doing it though, except to be offered a job working on Windows :) * Forbidding collaboration with other recipients to discover how the OS behaves. Other recipients are explicitly excluded - for use by one person at a time[1] - so the rest of this point doesn't really make any sense to me. That said, it does trigger some memories of when I was contributing to ReactOS years ago... is this one of their suggestions about how to avoid taint? (Or maybe from Wine?) Those guys have obtained their own legal advice which is going to be aimed at preventing a court case (not just preventing a loss - preventing it from happening in the first place) and so it's going to be based on an interpretation of the license and be more defensive than most people need to worry about. * Refusal to disclose the source code for the running OS to the recipient. Again, it's part of the business and legal model. If you really want access to the source code, you can pay for it, but most people and businesses can't afford it or don't want it that badly. (There are also technical reasons why the source code can't easily be disclosed - how many hundreds of gigabytes of code are you willing to download and wade through? Yes, it's that big.) * Forbidding the recipient from getting their choice of vendor to make improvements to the OS and collaborate with other recipients on the improvements. I know this used to exist, as there were a number of RT/embedded OSs available that were based on Windows. I think at this point they've all been absorbed into Microsoft though. * Arrogating control of the running OS to a party other than the license recipient, including the ability to (at Microsoft's sole discretion) deny applications to run, and to disable features of the OS. * Arrogating data collection to Microsoft and undisclosed third parties, tracking broad classes of activity on the OS and sending the logs to a server not of the recipient's choosing. It seems you fundamentally disagree with the 'licensing' model and would prefer an 'ownership' model. That's fine, but it's not the business model Windows operates under and that is unlikely to ever change. Even if I were CEO, I'd have a hard time changing that one :) Does this prevent you from creating a VM on a cloud provider on your own account? If I need to accept restrictions such as the above, I don't see that the location of the instance (nor the fees charged) has any affect on these concerns. The risks discussed above are not mitigated. If the licensing is a real issue, I'm in a position where I can have a positive impact on fixing it, so any info you can provide me (on- or off-list) about your concerns is valuable. Thank you for this offer, I am glad to see willingness expressed to solve these restrictions. I hope you can achieve software freedom for all recipients of Microsoft operating systems. Until then, the risk is too great to anyone to whom I have professional responsibilities, and my advice must continue to be that they avoid accepting such restrictions. That's a fair enough position, and without people taking that stance, Linux (and practically every OS that's based on it) wouldn't be anywhere near as usable as it is today. I'm also fully aware of people with the exact opposite stance who give the exact opposite advice, so there's room in this world for all of us. I'm sorry I can't do any better than the few responses above - these are big issues that run to the core of how Microsoft does business, and not only am I incapable of changing them, I'm nowhere near capable of fully understanding how it all fits together. Thanks for being willing to engage, though. It's always valuable to hear alternative points of
Re: [Distutils] Call for information - What assumptions can I make about Unix users' access to Windows?
On Nov 7, 2014, at 10:46 AM, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote: I'm in the process of developing an automated solution to allow users to quickly set up a Windows box so that it can be used to compile Python extensions and build wheels. While it can obviously be used by Windows developers who want to quickly set up a box, my main target is Unix developers who want to provide wheels for Windows users. To that end, I'd like to get an idea of what sort of access to Windows a typical Unix developer would have. I'm particularly interested in whether Windows XP/Vista is still in use, and whether you're likely to already have Python and/or any development tools installed. Ideally, a clean Windows 7 or later virtual machine is the best environment, but I don't know if it's reasonable to assume that. Another alternative is to have an Amazon EC2 AMI prebuilt, and users can just create an instance based on it. That seems pretty easy to do from my perspective but I don't know if the connectivity process (remote desktop) is a problem for Unix developers. Any feedback would be extremely useful. I'm at a point where I can pretty easily set up any of these options, but if they don't turn out to actually be usable by the target audience, it's a bit of a waste of time! :-) Thanks, Paul ___ Distutils-SIG maillist - distutils-...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/distutils-sig As an *nix user I have a Windows 7 VM on my OS X machine that I can also dual boot into which I mostly use for playing games that won’t play on my OS X box natively. It does not have Python or any development tooling installed on it. I also have access to the cloud(tm) which is where I normally spin up a whatever-the-most-recent-looking-name Windows Server. --- Donald Stufft PGP: 7C6B 7C5D 5E2B 6356 A926 F04F 6E3C BCE9 3372 DCFA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [Distutils] Call for information - What assumptions can I make about Unix users' access to Windows?
On 07 Nov 2014, at 16:46, Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com wrote: I'm in the process of developing an automated solution to allow users to quickly set up a Windows box so that it can be used to compile Python extensions and build wheels. While it can obviously be used by Windows developers who want to quickly set up a box, my main target is Unix developers who want to provide wheels for Windows users. To that end, I'd like to get an idea of what sort of access to Windows a typical Unix developer would have. In my case: none. The only form of Windows I have are VMs I grab from modern.ie http://modern.ie/ to test things with various IE versions. Those are all throw-away instances that are never used for anything other than IE testing. Wichert.-- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
RE: [Distutils] Call for information - What assumptions can I make about Unix users' access to Windows?
Ben Finney wrote: Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com writes: To that end, I'd like to get an idea of what sort of access to Windows a typical Unix developer would have. […] Ideally, a clean Windows 7 or later virtual machine is the best environment, but I don't know if it's reasonable to assume that. It's difficult to say what “a typical Unix developer” is. But a significant use case is going to be “no legal access to any MS Windows instance”. The restrictions of the license terms make MS Windows an unacceptable risk on any machine I'm responsible for. Just out of interest, which restrictions would those be? I may be able to raise them with one of our lawyers and get some clarification. It has been many years since I've even had a colleague who has a MS Windows instance, and I am not sure where I'd go for one if the need arose. If I was required to provide packages for MS Windows, the only viable solutions would be those that don't involve me obtaining an MS Windows instance myself. Does this prevent you from creating a VM on a cloud provider on your own account? As far as Microsoft Azure is concerned, this is well within the license restrictions (at least for Windows Server right now), and all providers giving you access to Windows should be bundling in a license fee, which makes it about as legit as possible. Simply giving you share time on someone else's copy of Windows is much more of a grey area as far as licensing is concerned. If the licensing is a real issue, I'm in a position where I can have a positive impact on fixing it, so any info you can provide me (on- or off-list) about your concerns is valuable. Cheers, Steve -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [Distutils] Call for information - What assumptions can I make about Unix users' access to Windows?
On 7 November 2014 16:52, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote: If I was required to provide packages for MS Windows, the only viable solutions would be those that don't involve me obtaining an MS Windows instance myself. For that usage, an Amazon EC2 AMI sounds ideal, as the license costs are covered by the AWS costs (which are zero, if you're on the free usage tier). Paul -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [Distutils] Call for information - What assumptions can I make about Unix users' access to Windows?
On 7 November 2014 17:17, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote: Paul Moore p.f.mo...@gmail.com writes: On 7 November 2014 16:52, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote: If I was required to provide packages for MS Windows, the only viable solutions would be those that don't involve me obtaining an MS Windows instance myself. For that usage […] the license costs […] I didn't mention monetary costs at all. My understanding is that changing the cost doesn't in any way affect the terms of the license one is bound by. Sorry, I misunderstood you. As Steve said, it would be necessary to understand the restrictions you're working under to be able to comment. Paul -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: [Distutils] Call for information - What assumptions can I make about Unix users' access to Windows?
On 7 November 2014 17:42, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote: Does this prevent you from creating a VM on a cloud provider on your own account? If I need to accept restrictions such as the above, I don't see that the location of the instance (nor the fees charged) has any affect on these concerns. The risks discussed above are not mitigated. Thanks for the clarification. Given what you say, I don't see any way that I can offer a solution you'd be willing to accept - I suspect the only viable option for you would be support for cross-compilation using mingw/ggg, which I'm not able to offer. For now, I guess, that simply means I'll have to consider you (and anyone else for whom even running a Windows system is unacceptable) outside of my target audience. Paul -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
