[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kwrite-devel
Subject: Re: Non-free file in pate js_utils plugin
From: "Philipp A." <flying-sheep () web ! de>
Date: 2013-12-03 17:58:41
Message-ID: CAN8d9gmHkHLCYQjDs1nmPDFdayORmGkJ=YetEtFBnNkwv4EO1g () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
ok, so how to fix this?
up until now, the code was bascically the same as now, just that jslint was
an external dependency. it downloaded nonfree code without user agreement
or notification.
should i just return to the downloading begavior for JSLint and show the
user a license agreement when they first try to use JSLint? or should i
remove JSLint and only leave JSHint (which is plain MIT licensed)
again: reverting is NOT an option, since the previous behavior had the same
problem, just less visible
2013/12/3 Milian Wolff <mail@milianw.de>
> On Tuesday 03 December 2013 15:41:54 Philipp A. wrote:
> > GOD DAMMIT i'm sorry. Afaik only JSLint, not JSHint is under doug's
> > modified MIT license (wikipedia is wrong that they allegedly use the same
> > license). and the phrase doug added which made JSLint's MIT license
> nonfree
> > is ridiculously "The Software shall be used for good, not evil"… If we
> > however identify as "minions of IBM", then we can freely use it, since he
> > explicitly allowed IBM (and their minions) to use his software for evil
> :)
> >
> > i still want the user to be able to use JSLint, and there should be a
> > solution. while the old python lib that got used to provide JSLint
> > functionality "got around it" by downloading JSHint on demand, i doubt
> that
> > this is OK. the only difference is that it's not in our repo, but that
> > doesn't change the fact that js_utils used the code before just like it
> > uses the code now. so my change only directed attention to it, and didn't
> > add a new incompatible license.
> >
> > i think we could require the user to click a one-time messagebox which
> says
> > "you're only allowed to lint your JavaScript for good, not for evil",
> and,
> > if he declines, fail to load the js_utils plugin with a
> > UserIsEvilException. sounds good?
>
> No. The KDE source code must not contain non-free code which this is. You
> have
> to remove it from the repository.
>
> Bye
> --
> Milian Wolff
> mail@milianw.de
> http://milianw.de
> _______________________________________________
> KWrite-Devel mailing list
> KWrite-Devel@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kwrite-devel
>
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div>ok, so how to fix this?<br><br></div>up until \
now, the code was bascically the same as now, just that jslint was an external \
dependency. it downloaded nonfree code without user agreement or notification.<br> \
<br></div><div>should i just return to the downloading begavior for JSLint and show \
the user a license agreement when they first try to use JSLint? or should i remove \
JSLint and only leave JSHint (which is plain MIT licensed)<br> <br></div><div>again: \
reverting is NOT an option, since the previous behavior had the same problem, just \
less visible<br></div></div></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div \
class="gmail_quote">2013/12/3 Milian Wolff <span dir="ltr"><<a \
href="mailto:mail@milianw.de" target="_blank">mail@milianw.de</a>></span><br> \
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On Tuesday 03 December 2013 15:41:54 Philipp \
A. wrote:<br> > GOD DAMMIT i'm sorry. Afaik only JSLint, not JSHint is under \
doug's<br> > modified MIT license (wikipedia is wrong that they allegedly use the \
same<br> > license). and the phrase doug added which made JSLint's MIT license \
nonfree<br> > is ridiculously "The Software shall be used for good, not evil"… \
If we<br> > however identify as "minions of IBM", then we can freely use it, since \
he<br> > explicitly allowed IBM (and their minions) to use his software for evil \
:)<br> ><br>
> i still want the user to be able to use JSLint, and there should be a<br>
> solution. while the old python lib that got used to provide JSLint<br>
> functionality "got around it" by downloading JSHint on demand, i doubt that<br>
> this is OK. the only difference is that it's not in our repo, but that<br>
> doesn't change the fact that js_utils used the code before just like it<br>
> uses the code now. so my change only directed attention to it, and didn't<br>
> add a new incompatible license.<br>
><br>
> i think we could require the user to click a one-time messagebox which says<br>
> "you're only allowed to lint your JavaScript for good, not for evil", and,<br>
> if he declines, fail to load the js_utils plugin with a<br>
> UserIsEvilException. sounds good?<br>
<br>
</div>No. The KDE source code must not contain non-free code which this is. You \
have<br> to remove it from the repository.<br>
<br>
Bye<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">--<br>
Milian Wolff<br>
<a href="mailto:mail@milianw.de">mail@milianw.de</a><br>
<a href="http://milianw.de" target="_blank">http://milianw.de</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
KWrite-Devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:KWrite-Devel@kde.org">KWrite-Devel@kde.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kwrite-devel" \
target="_blank">https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kwrite-devel</a><br> \
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
_______________________________________________
KWrite-Devel mailing list
KWrite-Devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kwrite-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic