Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

* Russ Allbery: > Florian Weimer writes: > >> Do you think Debian should welcome embargoes for GPL compliance issues? >> Security embargoes are a huge pain, but one would hope that GPL >> violations by Linux distributions are much rarer events. > > I'm sorry, I think I'm missing some basic contex

Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

Paul Wise writes: > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 12:36 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: >> I may just be hopelessly naive or out of touch, but I feel like the >> termination of rights clauses under the GPLv2 and GPLv3 are widely >> ignored for good-faith violations (such as those Debian would make) and >> basi

Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 12:36 PM, Russ Allbery wrote: > I may just be hopelessly naive or out of touch, but I feel like the > termination of rights clauses under the GPLv2 and GPLv3 are widely ignored > for good-faith violations (such as those Debian would make) and basically > never enforced that

Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

Paul Wise writes: > It seems to me that Florian is talking about the rare GPL violations > that Debian (and other distros) commit and keeping those secret until > they can be rectified. These happen (and are sometimes caused by > upstreams like the GNU project). ISTR in the past we have just rect

Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Russ Allbery wrote: > What exactly would we be embargoing, and why? It seems to me that Florian is talking about the rare GPL violations that Debian (and other distros) commit and keeping those secret until they can be rectified. These happen (and are sometimes ca

Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

Florian Weimer writes: > Do you think Debian should welcome embargoes for GPL compliance issues? > Security embargoes are a huge pain, but one would hope that GPL > violations by Linux distributions are much rarer events. I'm sorry, I think I'm missing some basic context required to make sense o

Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

Ian Jackson writes ("Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?"): > I think it was entirely wrong of the Conservancy's Linux GPL > enforcement project to go along with the idea of promising to give > violators a GPLv3-style termination clause. Needless to say I don't approve of this "com

Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

Florian Weimer writes ("Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?"): > Nothing can be done about GPLv2-only violations and the resulting > license termination, of course. This is a bit of a tangent, of course, but: I see this as a feature. If corporations are upset by the possibility that t

Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

* Jonathan Carter: > Having said all of that, I don't know of any case where Debian has > specifically named and shamed anyone regarding such a violation, but I > also don't see a reason why Debian should explicitly try to keep those > secret for no good reason. The main advantage for Debian woul

Re: Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

Hi Florian On 12/09/2018 21:19, Florian Weimer wrote: > Do you think Debian should welcome embargoes for GPL compliance > issues? Security embargoes are a huge pain, but one would hope that > GPL violations by Linux distributions are much rarer events. I'm only speaking on my own behalf here, bu

Do we need embargoes for GPL compliance issues?

Do you think Debian should welcome embargoes for GPL compliance issues? Security embargoes are a huge pain, but one would hope that GPL violations by Linux distributions are much rarer events. I'm asking because even with the GPLv3 or the Common Cure , the 30-day p