[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: J._Pablo_Martín_Cobos <goinnn () gmail ! com>
Date: 2013-12-04 12:28:23
Message-ID: CALNyWLHX2Rfm0x6Dq1cTLWepEyMiEjLpqQiAJzEQtcKv6Sfopg () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
2013/12/4 Philipp A. <flying-sheep@web.de>
> at first: i=92ll leave out that =93arguably=94 stuff: debian and fedora d=
ecided
> that it=92s nonfree, and we want to be compatible with them, so we treat =
it
> JSLint as if bill gates personally had written it, OK?
>
> 2013/12/4 J. Pablo Mart=EDn Cobos <goinnn@gmail.com>
>
>> pyjslint is python wrapper of JSLint, and its code is BSD-licensed. It i=
s
>> true that it downloads jslint and invokes it using node.js, but how do
>> changes the fact that the python wrapper is BSD-licensed?
>>
>>
>> jslint is released under a modified MIT license. It is arguably if that
>> license is free software or not. But even in the case of it not being fr=
ee
>> (arguably), why can't a BSD-licensed software interact with it? Nowhere =
in
>> the BSD license is that restriction. And since it is pyjslint who downlo=
ads
>> the jslint file, it is not present in the KDE repository, so KDE is not
>> distributing an arguably non free software, even if the jslint license
>> grants freedom of distribution.
>>
>
> you=92re right that it doesn=92t change the wrapper=92s own license at al=
l. but
> since the wrapper downloads nonfree software, the user ends up with nonfr=
ee
> software as soon as he runs it.
>
> it=92s not the intent of free software to circumvent its own principles b=
y
> dynamically downloading incompatible parts. providing a interface that yo=
u
> can plug un your own nonfree stuff: OK. but automatically retrieving and
> plugging in that nonfree stuff without asking the user: not OK.
>
> so the problem is this usecase:
>
> 1. the user downloaded debian and wants a purely free software system
> 2. the user wants to edit javascript using kate
> 3. the user discovers the js_utils plugun and activates it. (do far
> everything is OK: Debian, KDE, Kate, js_utils are all free)
> 4. the user sees =93Error: this plugin depends on pyjslint=94
> 5. the user installs pyjslint to use js_utils (still everything OK,
> pyjslint is BSD licensed)
> 6. the user restarts kate and uses js_utils, but unknowingly he has
> been slipped nonfree code. nobody warned him, it=92s just there now.
>
>
>
We could add a message: "If you install pyjslint this will download an non
free software". This is a solution, this is not a great solution but I
think that this is the best.
Do you think about it?
And please, try to be polite, "pyjslint basically lies about its license",
this was very offensive for my workmate. I do not want to discuss more,
please read your emails before sending.
Best regards,
--
Pablo Mart=EDn
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<div dir="ltr">2013/12/4 Philipp A. <span dir="ltr"><<a \
href="mailto:flying-sheep@web.de" \
target="_blank">flying-sheep@web.de</a>></span><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div \
class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px \
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">at first: i’ll leave out that “arguably” stuff: debian and fedora \
decided that it’s nonfree, and we want to be compatible with them, so we treat it \
JSLint as if bill gates personally had written it, OK?<br> <div>
<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div class="im">2013/12/4 J. \
Pablo Martín Cobos <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:goinnn@gmail.com" \
target="_blank">goinnn@gmail.com</a>></span><br></div><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px \
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div>pyjslint is \
python wrapper of JSLint, and its code is BSD-licensed. It is true that it downloads \
jslint and invokes it using node.js, but how do changes the fact that the python \
wrapper is BSD-licensed?<div class="im"> <br>
<div><br></div>
jslint is released under a modified MIT license. It is
arguably if that license is free software or not. But even in the case
of it not being free (arguably), why can't a BSD-licensed software
interact with it? Nowhere in the BSD license is that restriction. And
since it is pyjslint who downloads the jslint file, it is not present in
the KDE repository, so KDE is not distributing an arguably non free
software, even if the jslint license grants freedom of \
distribution.</div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>you’re \
right that it doesn’t change the wrapper’s own license at all. but since the wrapper \
downloads nonfree software, the user ends up with nonfree software as soon as he runs \
it.<br>
<br></div><div>it’s not the intent of free software to circumvent its own principles \
by dynamically downloading incompatible parts. providing a interface that you can \
plug un your own nonfree stuff: OK. but automatically retrieving and plugging in that \
nonfree stuff without asking the user: not OK.</div>
<div><br></div><div>so the problem is this usecase:<br><ol><li>the user downloaded \
debian and wants a purely free software system</li><li>the user wants to edit \
javascript using kate</li><li>the user discovers the js_utils plugun and activates \
it. (do far everything is OK: Debian, KDE, Kate, js_utils are all free)</li>
<li>the user sees “Error: this plugin depends on pyjslint”</li><li>the user installs \
pyjslint to use js_utils (still everything OK, pyjslint is BSD licensed)</li><li>the \
user restarts kate and uses js_utils, but unknowingly he has been slipped nonfree \
code. nobody warned him, it’s just there now.<br>
</li></ol></div></div></div></div></div>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>We could add a message: "If you install \
pyjslint this will download an non free software". This is a solution, this is \
not a great solution but I think that this is the best.</div> <div><br></div><div>Do \
you think about it?</div><div><br></div><div>And please, try to be polite, \
"pyjslint basically lies about its license", this was very offensive for my \
workmate. I do not want to discuss more, please read your emails before \
sending.</div> <div><br></div><div>Best \
regards,</div><div><br></div><div>--</div><div><br></div><div>Pablo \
Martín</div></div></div></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