Packaging Rust for Fedora
Packaging Rust for Fedora
Posted Oct 30, 2022 14:49 UTC (Sun) by kleptog (subscriber, #1183)In reply to: Packaging Rust for Fedora by seanyoung
Parent article: Packaging Rust for Fedora
Nowadays we have the idea that a hash uniquely defines a given release of code and can be used to actually find the corresponding source. And that you can sort of rely on the idea that it will not randomly disappear off the internet. So it might be kind of feasible to carve out an exception there, where the builder has a proxy that registers which creates were downloaded and includes the relevant hashes in the package metadata.
But if a package just downloaded other assets off the internet it could become very difficult to reproduce. Maybe hook the builder into the internet archive and cross your fingers? Easier just to forbid the builder access to the internet and expect the uploader to predeclare dependencies.
People building closed source software are generally less concerned about reproducibility.
Posted Oct 30, 2022 17:10 UTC (Sun)
by khim (subscriber, #9252)
[Link]
Please don't. In 10 years it would disappear. Just put all the crates you need on the server you own. Then you can use hashes to your heart's content.
Posted Oct 31, 2022 7:22 UTC (Mon)
by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325)
[Link] (4 responses)
> The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means all
So if the thing you're downloading is a "generally available free program," then it does not need to be included. Since the material in question is *possible* to download from the internet (presumably, from an automated script with no human intervention), that strongly suggests that it is generally available at least.
While the preamble of the license does talk about free software in general terms, neither the preamble nor the definitions section give an explicit description of what exactly qualifies as a "free" program (for example, the four freedoms are nowhere to be found). Courts will use the dictionary definition, and (probably) conclude that a "free" program is one which costs $0. I'm sure this would annoy the hell out of RMS, but that is how courts read contracts and licenses - only the material within the four corners of the document is part of the agreement. The fact that the Free Software Foundation chooses to use the word "free" in a way that is different from the general public is, legally, their problem, and they need to clarify that in the license if they want courts to respect it.
Posted Oct 31, 2022 8:29 UTC (Mon)
by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
[Link] (3 responses)
WHICH dictionary definition? Courts are (supposed to be) intelligent, and given that Free has a clearly defined meaning in the FLOSS world, I'm sure a UK court would conclude this passes the "knew or should have known" test.
Incidentally, that's why I always use the abbreviation FLOSS, not FOSS.
Cheers,
Posted Oct 31, 2022 8:55 UTC (Mon)
by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325)
[Link] (2 responses)
There are several different problems with that argument:
0. As I mentioned, the meaning of a legal document is generally determined by its contents, not by other stuff, no matter how relevant that other stuff might seem. If the four freedoms are not in the license, then they are Not In The License. This is already the usual legal rule, but it is reinforced by section 7's ban on "further restrictions."
> 1: not costing or charging anything
The basic problem here is that (1) is the only sense (of those three) that can obviously be applied to inanimate objects like software, just based on the literal wording of these definitions. It would not make sense, for example, to give software "the legal and political rights of a citizen" or to describe it as "capable of choosing for itself," unless we're talking about some kind of general AI system that doesn't (yet) exist. You can argue that the FSF's use of the term is a perfectly reasonable extension of (2) and/or (3), but it is not literally identical to (2) or (3), so the average court probably isn't going to go out on that limb.
[1]: See e.g. https://lwn.net/Articles/747563/
Posted Nov 1, 2022 13:30 UTC (Tue)
by kleptog (subscriber, #1183)
[Link] (1 responses)
AIUI this is a Common Law thing. In much of the world the legal framework takes into consideration what was intended, how the parties understood it and how a reasonable person would understand it. That's why you don't need to add "don't be an asshole" to contracts, it's implied.
Yes, this trips up US/UK companies occasionally when they come up to a European court with the defence: "we adhered to the letter of the contract". Whether courts will understand the correct meaning of "free" is not something I worry about.
Posted Nov 1, 2022 23:37 UTC (Tue)
by ssokolow (guest, #94568)
[Link]
See this legal review of the CC0 for more on that.
(TL;DR: The CC0 has a license fallback because German law doesn't have a concept of prematurely giving up your copyright, and it has a legally binding promise not to sue, because German law doesn't let you pre-emptively sign away rights and protections that will be written into the law at some future date.)
> And that you can sort of rely on the idea that it will not randomly disappear off the internet.
Packaging Rust for Fedora
Packaging Rust for Fedora
> the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable
> work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to
> control those activities. However, it does not include the work's
> System Libraries, or general-purpose tools or generally available free
> programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but
> which are not part of the work. For example, Corresponding Source
> includes interface definition files associated with source files for
> the work, and the source code for shared libraries and dynamically
> linked subprograms that the work is specifically designed to require,
> such as by intimate data communication or control flow between those
> subprograms and other parts of the work.
Packaging Rust for Fedora
Wol
Packaging Rust for Fedora
1. Anyone could be a licensee, not just people "in the FLOSS world."The GPL is routinely presented in installer wizards (on Windows) where an EULA would normally be displayed, and the end user might not have any idea that there is a such thing as "the FLOSS world." So you can't necessarily expect them to be familiar with nonstandard terminology.
2. The GPL is probably[1] a contract. So contra proferentem applies, and common law courts will (usually) prefer to interpret ambiguity in favor of the non-drafting party, meaning you get the more permissive definition if more than one would make sense.
3. Let's use [2] as an example dictionary, because it's the sort of dictionary a court might use (i.e. a regular everyday dictionary, not a specialized law dictionary or something). It gives these senses of the word "free," if we cut out all of the irrelevant senses (of which there are quite a few):
> a free school
> a free ticket
> 2a: having the legal and political rights of a citizen
> For many African Americans, celebrating the Fourth of July as the day Americans became free from British rule feels inapplicable since our ancestors were not free.
> — Christen A. Johnson
> b: enjoying civil and political liberty
> free citizens
> c: enjoying political independence or freedom from outside domination
> This is a free country.
> d: enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of another
> You are free to do whatever you want.
> 3a: not determined by anything beyond its own nature or being : choosing or capable of choosing for itself
> a player free to negotiate a contract with any team
> b: determined by the choice of the actor or performer
> free actions
> c: made, done, or given voluntarily or spontaneously
> gave his free consent
[2]: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/free
Packaging Rust for Fedora
It also trips up people from commonwealth and former commonwealth countries when they learn that saying "I'm putting this into the public domain" isn't enough in jurisdictions like Germany.
Packaging Rust for Fedora