From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 21277 invoked from network); 29 Jan 2022 13:03:14 -0000 Received: from tb-ob1.topicbox.com (64.147.108.173) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 29 Jan 2022 13:03:14 -0000 Received: from tb-mx0.topicbox.com (tb-mx0.nyi.icgroup.com [10.90.30.73]) by tb-ob1.topicbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E5832C622 for ; Sat, 29 Jan 2022 08:03:13 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from bounce.mM5595c4fa89c61db53873ff4c.r522be890-2105-11eb-b15e-8d699134e1fa@9fans.bounce.topicbox.com) Received: by tb-mx0.topicbox.com (Postfix, from userid 1132) id 9B19A1448978; Sat, 29 Jan 2022 08:03:13 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=9fans.net; h=to:subject :message-id:references:in-reply-to:date:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:from:list-help:list-id :list-post:list-subscribe:reply-to:list-unsubscribe; s=dkim-1; bh=2DJ8uKRa4/HizRVr7ce+sG6ouGmkpV3L5INZ8R6fiRw=; b=OlOiASxt+PVn JQ0c2eY73CpT0N6V7o2BowY/GynY89usTHaosWTdIbCqsW1JPV8u74T+POYdq94w hl5J2WiWSEeGisy2ap8v+G4DNottmYlpSaosbCe4ijJLFuOLJvq7Gi8Qf1BWsbJt 5rsaXtV6dYNnGotVDTwHgNuMhUKzO2g= To: 9fans <9fans@9fans.net> Subject: Re: [9fans] licence question Message-Id: <16434613850.BC38c.59069@composer.9fans.topicbox.com> References: <16433324650.ff90B.935638@composer.9fans.topicbox.com> <16433713090.e62E5Cc03.507002@composer.9fans.topicbox.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 08:03:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=16434613851.Ca7C38.59069 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Policy-Reasoning: allow: sender is a member Topicbox-Message-UUID: ccbd9108-8103-11ec-bee8-33da212d11b0 Archived-At: =?UTF-8?B?PGh0dHBzOi8vOWZhbnMudG9waWNib3guY29tL2dyb3Vwcy85?= =?UTF-8?B?ZmFucy9UM2UwN2JmZGYyNjNhODNjOC1NNTU5NWM0ZmE4OWM2MWRiNTM4NzNm?= =?UTF-8?B?ZjRjPg==?= From: "ibrahim via 9fans" <9fans@9fans.net> List-Help: List-Id: "9fans" <9fans.9fans.net> List-Post: List-Software: Topicbox v0 List-Subscribe: Precedence: list Reply-To: 9fans <9fans@9fans.net> List-Unsubscribe: , Topicbox-Delivery-ID: 2:9fans:437d30aa-c441-11e9-8a57-d036212d11b0:522be890-2105-11eb-b15e-8d699134e1fa:M5595c4fa89c61db53873ff4c:1:7pd_hV1wHoWDy0r6cb096R2kV-OZvwTwzOfp1fBbjcw --16434613851.Ca7C38.59069 Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 08:03:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Friday, 28 January 2022, at 10:59 PM, hiro wrote: > why should it be closed source? you're gonna seriously put the effort to remove all the traces of source fi= les? This kiosk app is meant for students in math, electrotechnics, mechanics ..= . its a closed area network where only registered students can connect. Thi= s plattform is only meant for exchange of data and informations. The app is= distributed as an iso to be run from bare hardware or qemu (virtual box). = The current version is running based on FreeBSD and has a size caused by X1= 1 necessity and accompanying programs of 800 MB. I'm trying to reduce the s= ize and increasing the performance by using plan9. My plattform generates f= orm many simulation tasks, symbolic calculations, plotting, ... intermediat= e C code and translates this to programs which are called as child processe= s and generate their output for rendering. LLVM is needed two times in the = FreeBSD installation once for X11 and once as a system compiler. By using p= lan9 I can reduce the size of this kiosk application to estimated 300 MB. I= gave plan9 a try a few years ago and was fascinated but the licence wasn't= attractive at that time. But now it's ideal for such tasks. Some sources are part of this installment inside a loop file those are prov= ided internally with a ramfs so in time compilation gets possible. The mome= nt I include GPL licensed code into this ramfs this would infect my own lic= ence. My plattform is BSD 2 claused the students can distribute it freely b= ut the mechanics for connecting to the closed area network are hidden. The = MIT licence, zlib, Ogg Vorbis license are compatible with BSD 2 license and= require proper acknowlegdement but GPL can't be used in such a manner.=20 Plan9 with its new license is optimal for such applications. I think that p= lan9 would have been more wide spread if this new license would have been a= pplied from the beginning. And I believe that the reason why NetBSD, OpenBS= D, FreeBSD are not as wide spread as Linux was the lack of a compiler suite= conforming to the BSD license. Some time ago the BSD project asked for a l= icense change for plan9 to integrate the C compiler which didn't happen at = that time. But I'm sure that in the near future their will be some BSD fork= s which will take more ideas and tools from Plan9 (especially the compiler = suite). Plan9 has more advantages besides those - nearly direct access to t= he hardware and a simplified way to enhancements due to its namespaces and = 9fs.=20 I'm using BSD systems since 1991 and I think its important to follow a stri= ct licensing scheme otherwise many years later as it happened in NetBSD, Fr= eeBSD and OpenBSD you start to search for alternative implementations cause= at some point your code is not accompanied by incompatible licensed code b= ut is depending on those so it is infected. If you decide to distribute a s= ystem with a non infecting open source license than its important to do thi= s in a consistent form. The more time passes the more you depend on parts a= nd the less gets the chance to exchange those parts.=20 I am consequently avoiding infecting licenses in my projects and my distrib= utions for decades now and those parts of plan9 (9front) which are not conf= orming are not a big deal to throw away. diff, patch are available in confo= rming licensed versions. I prefer ogg vorbis to mp3 due to its patent probl= ems in the past. There are dozens of truetype fonts with better quality and= distributable. The only problematic part not only to plan9 but also all BS= D systems is ghostscript but I have an existing translater from postscript = to svg and a closed source svg library for rendering for other projects whe= re I would perhaps need page and the dependency to ghostscript. No need for= lzip and xen ... The reason why this reply was this long is simple : My experience from the past and my involvements in BSD projects tought me t= hat many open source projects try to take large steps in short time and mos= t often they borrow code or libraries from projects not conforming with the= ir chosen license. Legal questions are taken very lightly for a few years b= ut than at some point in time those legal questions surface. The reason why= linux took over was this simple - BSD 4.3 lost its compilers. There are people (I am one of them) who also have to write commercial proje= cts for a living. I'm developing embedded software for electronic circuits = and plan9 is now a real alternative for me cause of its new license. I can = decide for each project if I want to make it open source or not. And by con= sequently avoiding infecting licenses I can use the same code base for open= source as well as closed source projects. Why do you think p9f asked for a relicensing of plan9 while it was already = gpl licensed a few years ago ? Both are redistributable but the MIT version= is also usable for closed source commercial projects while the GPL version= is not. Does this matter ? Yes of course it matters for people or companie= s. Its sometimes amusing to see developers taking legal issues lightly.=20 I'm not an advocate but be assured : The moment you distribute lets say a s= et top box based on plan9 using legacy9 or 9front and you don't delete thos= e mentioned parts from your distribution you can't make it closed source. I= f your set top box plays mp3 or opens a pdf ps file by using ghostscript an= d this is a significant part of the functionality you have created a derive= d work based on or depending on GPL'ed code. To solve this problem you woul= d have to seperate those parts from your hardware and make it downloadable = to keep it closed source. But this wouldn't be a real solution because page= depends on the existence of ghostscript to display pdf and ps files so you= have a 1:1 dependency. FSF perhaps won't take this seriously. Aladdin will= because they offer a commercial license alternative. And your concurrents = will also look closely to make your product open sourced. This is not ficti= on this is reality happening hundreds of times per year.=20 ------------------------------------------ 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/T3e07bfdf263a83c8-M5595c= 4fa89c61db53873ff4c Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription --16434613851.Ca7C38.59069 Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2022 08:03:05 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Friday, 28 January 2022, at 10:59 PM, hiro = wrote:
why should it be closed source? you're gonna seriously put the effort to remove all the traces of sourc= e files?

This kiosk app is meant fo= r students in math, electrotechnics, mechanics ... its a closed area networ= k where only registered students can connect. This plattform is only meant = for exchange of data and informations. The app is distributed as an iso to = be run from bare hardware or qemu (virtual box). The current version is run= ning based on FreeBSD and has a size caused by X11 necessity and accompanyi= ng programs of 800 MB. I'm trying to reduce the size and increasing the= performance by using plan9. My plattform generates form many simulation ta= sks, symbolic calculations, plotting, ... intermediate C code and translate= s this to programs which are called as child processes and generate their o= utput for rendering. LLVM is needed two times in the FreeBSD installation o= nce for X11 and once as a system compiler. By using plan9 I can reduce the = size of this kiosk application to estimated 300 MB. I gave plan9 a try a fe= w years ago and was fascinated but the licence wasn't attractive at tha= t time. But now it's ideal for such tasks.

=
Some sources are part of this installment inside a loop file those are= provided internally with a ramfs so in time compilation gets possible. The= moment I include GPL licensed code into this ramfs this would infect my ow= n licence. My plattform is BSD 2 claused the students can distribute it fre= ely but the mechanics for connecting to the closed area network are hidden.= The MIT licence, zlib, Ogg Vorbis license are compatible with BSD 2 licens= e and require proper acknowlegdement but GPL can't be used in such a ma= nner.

Plan9 with its new license is optim= al for such applications. I think that plan9 would have been more wide spre= ad if this new license would have been applied from the beginning. And I be= lieve that the reason why NetBSD, OpenBSD, FreeBSD are not as wide spread a= s Linux was the lack of a compiler suite conforming to the BSD license. Som= e time ago the BSD project asked for a license change for plan9 to integrat= e the C compiler which didn't happen at that time. But I'm sure tha= t in the near future their will be some BSD forks which will take more idea= s and tools from Plan9 (especially the compiler suite). Plan9 has more adva= ntages besides those - nearly direct access to the hardware and a simplifie= d way to enhancements due to its namespaces and 9fs.

I'm using BSD systems since 1991 and I think its important = to follow a strict licensing scheme otherwise many years later as it happen= ed in NetBSD, FreeBSD and OpenBSD you start to search for alternative imple= mentations cause at some point your code is not accompanied by incompatible= licensed code but is depending on those so it is infected. If you decide t= o distribute a system with a non infecting open source license than its imp= ortant to do this in a consistent form. The more time passes the more you d= epend on parts and the less gets the chance to exchange those parts.
=

I am consequently avoiding infecting licenses i= n my projects and my distributions for decades now and those parts of plan9= (9front) which are not conforming are not a big deal to throw away. diff, = patch are available in conforming licensed versions. I prefer ogg vorbis to= mp3 due to its patent problems in the past. There are dozens of truetype f= onts with better quality and distributable. The only problematic part not o= nly to plan9 but also all BSD systems is ghostscript but I have an existing= translater from postscript to svg and a closed source svg library for rend= ering for other projects where I would perhaps need page and the dependency= to ghostscript. No need for lzip and xen ...

<= div>The reason why this reply was this long is simple :
My experience from the past and my involvements in BSD projec= ts tought me that many open source projects try to take large steps in shor= t time and most often they borrow code or libraries from projects not confo= rming with their chosen license. Legal questions are taken very lightly for= a few years but than at some point in time those legal questions surface. = The reason why linux took over was this simple - BSD 4.3 lost its compilers= .

There are people (I am one of them) who = also have to write commercial projects for a living. I'm developing emb= edded software for electronic circuits and plan9 is now a real alternative = for me cause of its new license. I can decide for each project if I want to= make it open source or not. And by consequently avoiding infecting license= s I can use the same code base for open source as well as closed source pro= jects.

Why do you think p9f asked for a re= licensing of plan9 while it was already gpl licensed a few years ago ? Both= are redistributable but the MIT version is also usable for closed source c= ommercial projects while the GPL version is not. Does this matter ? Yes of = course it matters for people or companies. Its sometimes amusing to see dev= elopers taking legal issues lightly.

I= 9;m not an advocate but be assured : The moment you distribute lets say a s= et top box based on plan9 using legacy9 or 9front and you don't delete = those mentioned parts from your distribution you can't make it closed s= ource. If your set top box plays mp3 or opens a pdf ps file by using ghosts= cript and this is a significant part of the functionality you have created = a derived work based on or depending on GPL'ed code. To solve this prob= lem you would have to seperate those parts from your hardware and make it d= ownloadable to keep it closed source. But this wouldn't be a real solut= ion because page depends on the existence of ghostscript to display pdf and= ps files so you have a 1:1 dependency. FSF perhaps won't take this ser= iously. Aladdin will because they offer a commercial license alternative. A= nd your concurrents will also look closely to make your product open source= d. This is not fiction this is reality happening hundreds of times per year= .

= --16434613851.Ca7C38.59069--