Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
Next » 12
Simos Xenitellis Simos Xenitellis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Ignoring the repetition on who is entitled to source code and how they are told about it, I would like to know the answers to some very specific, tangible matters closer to home.  My question is basically whether the terms of a GPL license attached to a software distribution are applicable to that software distribution, not just downstream derivatives of it.  I assume the answer is yes.
>
>  - Dennis
>
> WHY I ASK
>
> I have a copy of LibreOffice 3.3.2 installed on my computer.  I am looking for any place that I am offered access to the specific (or, indeed, any) source code for the LibreOffice 3.3.2 distribution that I have installed (en-win-x86).
>

Admittedly, I never checked the UI text as to where you can get the
source code.

To build LibreOffice, I would simply follow the instructions at
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build
which cover different operating systems.

By following the instructions, you create a local "repository" of the
source code,
and this repository has *all* versions of LibreOffice (such as 3.3.2
and 3.4.0) and you can select which to build.
It should take you a few hours of downloading + compilation to create
your own LibreOffice.
If you have a fast Internet speed and a good computer, it should take
you about 3 hours of compilation.

Your question is actually about whether we can make the Help→License
information more informative
so that users who would like to build LibreOffice, will get directed
to the How_to_build page.

> Looking at the Help | License Information ... tells me about licenses and where to find them, but nothing about source code.  If I give this to my friends, none of them will see anything about source code either.
>
> If I examine the license, I see that LGPL3 incorporates terms of the GPL3 by reference, and license follows immediately thereafter.  The LGPL3 has definitions about source code and it being conveyed.  The GPL3 has the details.
>
> The preface to the GPL sys that
>
> "Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
> have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
> them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you
> want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new
> free programs, and that you know you can do these things."
>
> Section 6, which applies to the non-source form of the LibreOffice 3.3.2 that I installed specifies a number of ways that source code is still to be made available.  6(d) seems applicable to the way I obtained LibreOffice 3.3.2 by download:
>
> "d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no further charge. ..."
>
> SO WHERE IS IT?
>
> I know of no offer conveyed with the code.
>
> If I go back to the site, all I see are 3.3.3 Final and 3.4.0 Final.  I see nothing that would allow me to re-retrieve or find the source of the 3.3.2 that I have in my possession.
>
> If I follow the "Download the source code to build your own installer" (why does that have to be the reason?), I see a set of logs that tell me nothing.  Under 3.4.1.1, 3.4.0.2, and 3.3.3.1 I see lists of 20-21 tar.bz2's.
>
> Well, maybe that qualifies.  Maybe not.  But what about for my 3.3.2?
>

Indeed, the 3.3.2 version is not showing, because there are newer
versions (3.4.1, 3.4.0 and 3.3.3) and the 3.3.2 does not fit to be in
that page.
You can get 3.3.2 files at
http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/
http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/src/

As I said earlier, if you really want to compile, you would go for the
'git repositories' and the instructions at
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build

> AND ABOUT THOSE DEPENDENCIES
>
> If any of the listed dependencies also have derivatives used, is there some place where, ahem, those modified sources are available in some suitable way?
>

See the dependencies at
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build#Dependencies

Simos

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Dennis E. Hamilton Dennis E. Hamilton
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

I didn't say I didn't know how to do it.  I didn't say I wanted to build it.  This is about honoring the spirit of the free software promise.  It is not even about building the code.  People may want to do any number of things with the source code (inspect for bugs, for example).

I *did* say I don't see where the distro tells me how to find it and I don't see where the download page lets me find it "in the same way" (and now I can't even find the version that I am running). 20-21 tar.bz's are also rather intimidating, but way better than nothing.

So, where is the link on the web site that would let me find the version I am running and the source code for it?  (The same question for dependency derivatives is a bonus question.)

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Simos Xenitellis [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 16:31
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<[hidden email]> wrote:
[ ... ]
> I have a copy of LibreOffice 3.3.2 installed on my computer.  I am looking for any place that I am offered access to the specific (or, indeed, any) source code for the LibreOffice 3.3.2 distribution that I have installed (en-win-x86).
>

Admittedly, I never checked the UI text as to where you can get the
source code.

To build LibreOffice, I would simply follow the instructions at
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build
which cover different operating systems.

[ ... ]

Your question is actually about whether we can make the Help→License
information more informative
so that users who would like to build LibreOffice, will get directed
to the How_to_build page.

[ ... ]

> If I follow the "Download the source code to build your own installer" (why does that have to be the reason?), I see a set of logs that tell me nothing.  Under 3.4.1.1, 3.4.0.2, and 3.3.3.1 I see lists of 20-21 tar.bz2's.
>
> Well, maybe that qualifies.  Maybe not.  But what about for my 3.3.2?
>

Indeed, the 3.3.2 version is not showing, because there are newer
versions (3.4.1, 3.4.0 and 3.3.3) and the 3.3.2 does not fit to be in
that page.
You can get 3.3.2 files at
http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/
http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/src/

As I said earlier, if you really want to compile, you would go for the
'git repositories' and the instructions at
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build

> AND ABOUT THOSE DEPENDENCIES
>
> If any of the listed dependencies also have derivatives used, is there some place where, ahem, those modified sources are available in some suitable way?
>

See the dependencies at
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build#Dependencies

Simos

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Simos Xenitellis Simos Xenitellis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> I didn't say I didn't know how to do it.  I didn't say I wanted to build it.  This is about honoring the spirit of the free software promise.  It is not even about building the code.  People may want to do any number of things with the source code (inspect for bugs, for example).
>

To honour the "spirit" of the free software promise, it should be more
than adequate to grab the git repositories. Ask me if you want more
details for this.
To honour the "letter" of the free software promise, then you do need
those 3.3.2 tarballs.
A quick look at the TDF download website shows that it currently
covers the latest versions (due to space?), 3.3.3 for the 3.3 line,
and 3.4.0 for the 3.4 line.
Digging a bit deeper shows this
http://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/tdf/libreoffice/box/3.3.2/LibO_3.3.2-2_DVD_allplatforms_de.iso
2.8GB DVD ISO which I believe has the source code.

People who actually want to do things with the source code would need
to use the git repositories, as it shows the changes between different
versions.
You can also view online your 3.3.2 branch at
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice

Simos

> I *did* say I don't see where the distro tells me how to find it and I don't see where the download page lets me find it "in the same way" (and now I can't even find the version that I am running). 20-21 tar.bz's are also rather intimidating, but way better than nothing.
>
> So, where is the link on the web site that would let me find the version I am running and the source code for it?  (The same question for dependency derivatives is a bonus question.)
>
>  - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simos Xenitellis [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 16:31
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
>
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> [ ... ]
>> I have a copy of LibreOffice 3.3.2 installed on my computer.  I am looking for any place that I am offered access to the specific (or, indeed, any) source code for the LibreOffice 3.3.2 distribution that I have installed (en-win-x86).
>>
>
> Admittedly, I never checked the UI text as to where you can get the
> source code.
>
> To build LibreOffice, I would simply follow the instructions at
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build
> which cover different operating systems.
>
> [ ... ]
>
> Your question is actually about whether we can make the Help→License
> information more informative
> so that users who would like to build LibreOffice, will get directed
> to the How_to_build page.
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> If I follow the "Download the source code to build your own installer" (why does that have to be the reason?), I see a set of logs that tell me nothing.  Under 3.4.1.1, 3.4.0.2, and 3.3.3.1 I see lists of 20-21 tar.bz2's.
>>
>> Well, maybe that qualifies.  Maybe not.  But what about for my 3.3.2?
>>
>
> Indeed, the 3.3.2 version is not showing, because there are newer
> versions (3.4.1, 3.4.0 and 3.3.3) and the 3.3.2 does not fit to be in
> that page.
> You can get 3.3.2 files at
> http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/
> http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/src/
>
> As I said earlier, if you really want to compile, you would go for the
> 'git repositories' and the instructions at
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build
>
>> AND ABOUT THOSE DEPENDENCIES
>>
>> If any of the listed dependencies also have derivatives used, is there some place where, ahem, those modified sources are available in some suitable way?
>>
>
> See the dependencies at
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build#Dependencies
>
> Simos
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
>



--
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Dennis E. Hamilton Dennis E. Hamilton
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

I consider the spirit to always go beyond the letter.

We are talking past each other and I will stop now.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Simos Xenitellis [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 17:44
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> I didn't say I didn't know how to do it.  I didn't say I wanted to build it.  This is about honoring the spirit of the free software promise.  It is not even about building the code.  People may want to do any number of things with the source code (inspect for bugs, for example).
>

To honour the "spirit" of the free software promise, it should be more
than adequate to grab the git repositories. Ask me if you want more
details for this.
To honour the "letter" of the free software promise, then you do need
those 3.3.2 tarballs.
A quick look at the TDF download website shows that it currently
covers the latest versions (due to space?), 3.3.3 for the 3.3 line,
and 3.4.0 for the 3.4 line.
Digging a bit deeper shows this
http://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/tdf/libreoffice/box/3.3.2/LibO_3.3.2-2_DVD_allplatforms_de.iso
2.8GB DVD ISO which I believe has the source code.

People who actually want to do things with the source code would need
to use the git repositories, as it shows the changes between different
versions.
You can also view online your 3.3.2 branch at
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice

Simos

[ ... ]


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Simos Xenitellis Simos Xenitellis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Simos Xenitellis [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 17:44
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))
>
> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I didn't say I didn't know how to do it.  I didn't say I wanted to build it.  This is about honoring the spirit of the free software promise.  It is not even about building the code.  People may want to do any number of things with the source code (inspect for bugs, for example).
>>
>
> To honour the "spirit" of the free software promise, it should be more
> than adequate to grab the git repositories. Ask me if you want more
> details for this.
> To honour the "letter" of the free software promise, then you do need
> those 3.3.2 tarballs.
> A quick look at the TDF download website shows that it currently
> covers the latest versions (due to space?), 3.3.3 for the 3.3 line,
> and 3.4.0 for the 3.4 line.
> Digging a bit deeper shows this
> http://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/tdf/libreoffice/box/3.3.2/LibO_3.3.2-2_DVD_allplatforms_de.iso
> 2.8GB DVD ISO which I believe has the source code.
>
> People who actually want to do things with the source code would need
> to use the git repositories, as it shows the changes between different
> versions.
> You can also view online your 3.3.2 branch at
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice
>

On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 4:16 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> I consider the spirit to always go beyond the letter.
>

The spirit does go well beyond the letter.

The spirit of the free software promise wants to enable you to
actually work on the source code,
compile it, make your private enhancements and possibly submit those
modifications back to the community.

And there is no better way to do this than have the 'git repositories'
of the LibreOffice source code.
Ideally, the 'git repositories' should be what everyone gets, rather
than a source code snapshot that has no source change history.
Admittedly, the 'git repositories' are about 1.2GB, but once you have
a local copy, you can use frequently 'git pull' to update them with
any upstream changes.
Do you want to switch the repository view to the 3.3.2 version? Simply
run the command

git checkout --track origin/libreoffice-3-3-2

Having a source code snapshot (tarball) is probably not much useful
compared to what you get with using the repositories,
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build

Simos

--
A. Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q. Why is top posting bad?

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Robert Derman Robert Derman
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

In reply to this post by Simos Xenitellis
Simos Xenitellis wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> Ignoring the repetition on who is entitled to source code and how they are told about it, I would like to know the answers to some very specific, tangible matters closer to home.  My question is basically whether the terms of a GPL license attached to a software distribution are applicable to that software distribution, not just downstream derivatives of it.  I assume the answer is yes.
>>
>>  - Dennis
>>
>> WHY I ASK
>>
>> I have a copy of LibreOffice 3.3.2 installed on my computer.  I am looking for any place that I am offered access to the specific (or, indeed, any) source code for the LibreOffice 3.3.2 distribution that I have installed (en-win-x86).
>>
>>    
>
> Admittedly, I never checked the UI text as to where you can get the
> source code.
>
> To build LibreOffice, I would simply follow the instructions at
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/How_to_build
> which cover different operating systems.
>
> By following the instructions, you create a local "repository" of the
> source code,
> and this repository has *all* versions of LibreOffice (such as 3.3.2
> and 3.4.0) and you can select which to build.
> It should take you a few hours of downloading + compilation to create
> your own LibreOffice.
> If you have a fast Internet speed and a good computer, it should take
> you about 3 hours of compilation.
>
> Your question is actually about whether we can make the Help→License
> information more informative
> so that users who would like to build LibreOffice, will get directed
> to the How_to_build page.
>  
I had no trouble finding and downloading source code, it is posted right
there on the download site.  Actually I downloaded it purely for
curiosity, I am not qualified to write code in C++ , but I looked at it
using Notepad.  In that form, it is basically just gibberish, perhaps
you have to have a copy of the C++ programming language on your computer
in order to see it in an intelligible form, but at least I know that I
succeeded in getting the source of part of the Writer module.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
toki toki
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

In reply to this post by Simos Xenitellis
On 18/06/2011 09:39, Simos Xenitellis wrote:

> The spirit does go well beyond the letter.

> Ideally, the 'git repositories' should be what everyone gets, rather
> than a source code snapshot that has no source change history.

A couple of years ago I sent a question to FSF about meeting source code
requirements for GPLG programs. Specifically, I asked if substituting
the entire current code repository was acceptable, rather than a tarball
of the specific code that was (supposedly) used. Their response was that
the repository was acceptable. They also suggested that a ReadMe file
that contained the instructions on pulling the code that the program
used be included on the DVD.

jonathon
--
If Bing copied Google, there wouldn't be anything new worth requesting.

If Bing did not copy Google, there wouldn't be anything relevant worth
requesting.

                              DaveJakeman 20110207 Groklaw.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Tanstaafl Tanstaafl
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

In reply to this post by Simos Xenitellis
On 2011-06-18 5:39 AM, Simos Xenitellis wrote:
> And there is no better way to do this than have the 'git repositories'
> of the LibreOffice source code.

You were correct earlier - he is merely pointing out that nowhere in the
license agreement (I haven't read it so am not making the same claim)
does it say where or how to GET ACCESS TO the source code.

If this is true, it should be rectified immediately.

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
John LeMoyne Castle John LeMoyne Castle
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

Dennis, Tanstaafl,

I take your point.  Users that have 3.3.2 installed can only get the code for 3.3.3 from the website.  As discussed above, I think this meets the spirit of the license but not the specific letter. Simon's idea about downloading the repo at the 3.3.2 marker is a great one, but there is no path to that on either website or wiki.
Simos Xenitellis Simos Xenitellis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:22 PM, John LeMoyne Castle
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Dennis, Tanstaafl,
>
> I take your point.  Users that have 3.3.2 installed can only get the code
> for 3.3.3 from the website.  As discussed above, I think this meets the
> spirit of the license but not the specific letter. Simon's idea about
> downloading the repo at the 3.3.2 marker is a great one, but there is no
> path to that on either website or wiki.
>

Let's do it then!

1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which
says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a
specific Wiki page,
for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode

2. We create the web page which talks about the git repositories,
links to the pages
about cloning and checking out branches such as "libreoffice 3.3.2".

3. We write a patch for LibreOffice to add the special text and test it.

4. We submit a "bug report" to have the feature added to the next
version of LibreOffice.

I can help with items 2, 3 and 4.

I need help however as to
a. where exactly in the About box (or in the Help menu) shall we put
the short paragraph
Take screenshots and show on them where to add the text. Put those
screenshots on www.imgur.com,
send the URL here so we can view them.
b. what shall the text say. Propose something that will be helpful for someone
who genuinely wants to learn and use the LibreOffice source code.

Simos

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Jesús Corrius Jesús Corrius
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

> 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which
> says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a
> specific Wiki page,
> for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode

I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make
modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real*
source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can
download from the LibO website, hence the information will be
misleading.

We provide all the required source tarballs for each version and every
piece of code is in our git repository. So we fulfill all the
requirements but we have the problem that it's not easy to find. I
guess writing a good text about how to get the source code for every
version and place it in our download page (or a link to the wiki page)
is good enough.

--
Jesús Corrius <[hidden email]>
Document Foundation founding member
Mobile: +34 661 11 38 26
Skype: jcorrius | Twitter: @jcorrius

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Manfred Usselmann Manfred Usselmann
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 01:18:34 +0200
Jesús Corrius <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box
> > which says that if we are interested in the source code, we should
> > read a specific Wiki page,
> > for example
> > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode
>
> I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make
> modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real*
> source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can
> download from the LibO website, hence the information will be
> misleading.

In this case the distributions could modifiy the about box as well and
change the link accordingly...
Or just add an additional link to their specific version.

> We provide all the required source tarballs for each version and every
> piece of code is in our git repository. So we fulfill all the
> requirements but we have the problem that it's not easy to find. I
> guess writing a good text about how to get the source code for every
> version and place it in our download page (or a link to the wiki page)
> is good enough.

Should be sufficient as well.

Manfred


--
Manfred Usselmann <[hidden email]>

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Thorsten Behrens Thorsten Behrens
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

Manfred Usselmann wrote:

> > I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make
> > modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real*
> > source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can
> > download from the LibO website, hence the information will be
> > misleading.
>
> In this case the distributions could modifiy the about box as well and
> change the link accordingly...
> Or just add an additional link to their specific version.
>
I see little point in burdening distros with writing specific
instructions into tons of about boxes of their software, when there
are well-known distro methods to get the source (<pkg-manager>
install <pkgname>-src). Especially since all of that needs to be
translated into ~100 languages.

> > We provide all the required source tarballs for each version and every
> > piece of code is in our git repository. So we fulfill all the
> > requirements but we have the problem that it's not easy to find. I
> > guess writing a good text about how to get the source code for every
> > version and place it in our download page (or a link to the wiki page)
> > is good enough.
>
> Should be sufficient as well.
>
Sure, let's link to some build howto also from the download page -
but I consider this discussion somewhat moot, since anyone wanting
to modify and/or compile LibreOffice code (which is the whole
"spirit" behind copyleft) will surely visit the "Get Involved" or
"Developers" subpages (that are very prominently visible on the
libreoffice site). And that has all the info.

In closing, when a version is retired (3.3.2 is superseded by
3.3.3), both src and binary gets moved to

http://download.documentfoundation.org/libreoffice/old/

So nothing is lost. :)

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Simos Xenitellis Simos Xenitellis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

In reply to this post by Jesús Corrius
2011/6/21 Jesús Corrius <[hidden email]>:

>> 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which
>> says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a
>> specific Wiki page,
>> for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode
>
> I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make
> modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real*
> source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can
> download from the LibO website, hence the information will be
> misleading.
>

As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes
to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add
packaging instructions.
If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive
LibreOffice development
and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us
who they are.
I would not see this as a show stopper; we can just append something like

"If you did not receive LibreOffice from http://www.libreoffice.org/,
there might exist extra changes
to the source code. Consult the distributor that gave you the
LibreOffice installation packages for more details."

> We provide all the required source tarballs for each version and every
> piece of code is in our git repository. So we fulfill all the
> requirements but we have the problem that it's not easy to find. I
> guess writing a good text about how to get the source code for every
> version and place it in our download page (or a link to the wiki page)
> is good enough.
>

So, everyone agrees that in any case we should write a nice wiki page
that explains the merits of the copyleft LibreOffice?
That is, a Wiki page that explains in simple terms how to benefit from
the source code.
Stage 1 would be to simply visit
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/ and select the version they
have.
For LibreOffice 3.3.2 and the Writer module, it's
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/writer/tree/?h=libreoffice-3-3-2
From there, you can view the files online.

Stage 2 would be to clone the source code repositories. The compressed
repositories are about 1.2GB,
and with the working copies they should reach about 2GB.
Then, with git commands it is possible to switch to any branch/version
of LibreOffice (such as 3.3.2).
Using Git source code tools, it is easy to view changes.
For example, see http://trac.novowork.com/gitg/wiki/Screenshots

Stage 3 would be to compile the whole lot and produce a new version of
LibreOffice.

Stage 4 would be to make an elemental change in LibreOffice (such as
modify slightly the About dialog box),
compile, and view the change in the newly produced LibreOffice.

I think that such a document will empower the end-users, and make them
appreciate the fact that LibreOffice is copyleft.

Simos

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Sveinn í Felli Sveinn í Felli
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

In reply to this post by Jesús Corrius
Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis:

> 2011/6/21 Jesús Corrius<[hidden email]>:
>>> 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which
>>> says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a
>>> specific Wiki page,
>>> for example http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode
>>
>> I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make
>> modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real*
>> source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can
>> download from the LibO website, hence the information will be
>> misleading.
>>
>
> As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes
> to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add
> packaging instructions.
> If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive
> LibreOffice development
> and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us
> who they are.

At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing
extensive 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time.

Example:
<http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4&file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpm&query=libreoffice-branding>

Regards,
Sveinn í Felli


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Sirrý Sirrý
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

In reply to this post by Jesús Corrius


Þann þri 21.jún 2011 12:11, skrifaði Sveinn í Felli:

> Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis:
>> 2011/6/21 Jesús Corrius<[hidden email]>:
>>>> 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About
>>>> dialog box which
>>>> says that if we are interested in the source code, we
>>>> should read a
>>>> specific Wiki page,
>>>> for example
>>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode
>>>>
>>>
>>> I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make
>>> modifications to the original source code. That means
>>> that the *real*
>>> source code will be the one from your distro and not the
>>> one you can
>>> download from the LibO website, hence the information
>>> will be
>>> misleading.
>>>
>>
>> As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no
>> changes
>> to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do
>> is add
>> packaging instructions.
>> If you have information of a distribution that performs
>> extensive
>> LibreOffice development
>> and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then
>> please tell us
>> who they are.
>
> At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing
> extensive 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time.
>
> Example:
> <http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4&file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpm&query=libreoffice-branding>
>
>
> Regards,
> Sveinn í Felli
>

Better link here:
<http://software.opensuse.org/search?q=libreoffice-branding&baseproject=openSUSE%3A11.4&lang=en&exclude_debug=true>

Regards,
Sveinn


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Simos Xenitellis Simos Xenitellis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

In reply to this post by Jesús Corrius
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Sveinn í Felli <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis:
>>
>> 2011/6/21 Jesús Corrius<[hidden email]>:
>>>>
>>>> 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which
>>>> says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a
>>>> specific Wiki page,
>>>> for example
>>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode
>>>
>>> I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make
>>> modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real*
>>> source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can
>>> download from the LibO website, hence the information will be
>>> misleading.
>>>
>>
>> As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes
>> to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add
>> packaging instructions.
>> If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive
>> LibreOffice development
>> and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us
>> who they are.
>
> At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing extensive
> 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time.
>
> Example:
> <http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4&file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpm&query=libreoffice-branding>
>

I opened the file (file-roller can open .rpm files) and I only saw
some OpenSUSE branding icons and a small rc file.
There was no code in there, and the file is a 'noarch' one (No Architecture).

Perhaps you are referring to a different file?

Simos

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Sveinn í Felli Sveinn í Felli
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

In reply to this post by Jesús Corrius


Þann þri 21.jún 2011 12:46, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis:

> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Sveinn í Felli<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis:
>>>
>>> 2011/6/21 Jesús Corrius<[hidden email]>:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which
>>>>> says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a
>>>>> specific Wiki page,
>>>>> for example
>>>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode
>>>>
>>>> I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make
>>>> modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real*
>>>> source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can
>>>> download from the LibO website, hence the information will be
>>>> misleading.
>>>>
>>>
>>> As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes
>>> to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add
>>> packaging instructions.
>>> If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive
>>> LibreOffice development
>>> and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us
>>> who they are.
>>
>> At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing extensive
>> 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time.
>>
>> Example:
>> <http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4&file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpm&query=libreoffice-branding>
>>
>
> I opened the file (file-roller can open .rpm files) and I only saw
> some OpenSUSE branding icons and a small rc file.
> There was no code in there, and the file is a 'noarch' one (No Architecture).
>
> Perhaps you are referring to a different file?
>
> Simos
>

Better link here:
<http://software.opensuse.org/search?q=libreoffice-branding&baseproject=openSUSE%3A11.4&lang=en&exclude_debug=true>

BTW, there may be other packages as well.

regards,
Sveinn


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Simos Xenitellis Simos Xenitellis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

In reply to this post by Jesús Corrius
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Sveinn í Felli <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> Þann þri 21.jún 2011 12:46, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Sveinn í Felli<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Þann þri 21.jún 2011 11:18, skrifaði Simos Xenitellis:
>>>>
>>>> 2011/6/21 Jesús Corrius<[hidden email]>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. We want to add a paragraph somewhere in the About dialog box which
>>>>>> says that if we are interested in the source code, we should read a
>>>>>> specific Wiki page,
>>>>>> for example
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/AvailabilityOfSourceCode
>>>>>
>>>>> I see a problem here. Usually GNU/Linux distributions make
>>>>> modifications to the original source code. That means that the *real*
>>>>> source code will be the one from your distro and not the one you can
>>>>> download from the LibO website, hence the information will be
>>>>> misleading.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As far as I know, the distributions make minimal or no changes
>>>> to the actually code of LibreOffice. The best they will do is add
>>>> packaging instructions.
>>>> If you have information of a distribution that performs extensive
>>>> LibreOffice development
>>>> and did not bother to contribute them upstream, then please tell us
>>>> who they are.
>>>
>>> At least OpenSuse does more than that; they've been doing extensive
>>> 'branding' of both OOo and LO for quite some time.
>>>
>>> Example:
>>>
>>> <http://software.opensuse.org/search/download?base=openSUSE%3A11.4&file=openSUSE%3A%2FTumbleweed%3A%2FTesting%2FopenSUSE_Tumbleweed_standard%2Fnoarch%2Flibreoffice-branding-openSUSE-3.3.1-1.1.noarch.rpm&query=libreoffice-branding>
>>>
>>
>> I opened the file (file-roller can open .rpm files) and I only saw
>> some OpenSUSE branding icons and a small rc file.
>> There was no code in there, and the file is a 'noarch' one (No
>> Architecture).
>>
>> Perhaps you are referring to a different file?
>>
>> Simos
>>
>
> Better link here:
> <http://software.opensuse.org/search?q=libreoffice-branding&baseproject=openSUSE%3A11.4&lang=en&exclude_debug=true>
>
> BTW, there may be other packages as well.
>

I checked those files as well. They are all 'noarch' (do not contain
compiled programs; No Architecture),
and contain the same .png branding images.

Simos

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Jesús Corrius Jesús Corrius
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Availability of source code (Was: Re: OFF TOPIC about GPL enforcement (Was: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: [Libreoffice] Proposal to join Apache OpenOffice))

> I checked those files as well. They are all 'noarch' (do not contain
> compiled programs; No Architecture),
> and contain the same .png branding images.

The license not only covers the code, also the images. So if those
images are in the program, the source code must include them.

That's why the link to the source code has to point to them too, that
is, it must point to the modified source code of your distribution.
And not the original at LibreOffice's. Or point to both ;)

--
Jesús Corrius <[hidden email]>
Document Foundation founding member
Mobile: +34 661 11 38 26
Skype: jcorrius | Twitter: @jcorrius

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Next » 12