On Wed, Aug 12, 1998 at 06:02:20PM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote: > On Wed, 12 Aug 1998, Jules Bean wrote: > > On Wed, 12 Aug 1998, Michael Bramer wrote: > > > Today I have read the first time from the lcs projekt. > > > > > > After that I subcrib the lcp-en mailing list and found a eMail from > > > Dale Scheetz. In this eMail he send program code this a copyright. > > > I have ask him, to change the copyright to a DFSG-free copyright. > > > > > > This is the answer: > > > > IMHO, the 'validate' program should be modifiable, but should have a > > clause dictating that any modified version must be distributed under a > > different name, and clearly marked as such. > > And just what purpose would this "new" forked version serve? Validate a > different standard? Do some other job instead? A thought: We (debian) make a program to validate a debian system. (for cd-roms to put 'official Debian CDRom' on the cover) Now we must write a new program. A sec. thought: I maintain X-Terms. On this Terms I check the files time to time. (with diff etc) With this program I can change my check program to a program like validate.. > What "useful algorithm" am I keeping out of the hands of the rest of the > community by not allowing modification? The major portion of this package, > which is not visible in the script I published are the files containing > the lists of objects being checked. Change one character in any of these > lists and the validation proceedure will no longer be useful. > > This is a piece of software that serves a specific, narrow, purpose. > Allowing it to be modified only dilutes the strength of the test and the > standard. > > > Furthermore, the LCS team could have on their websites the sizes and > > md5sums of 'validate' (and any other scripts, and documents, which have > > similar issues attached to them). This means that it is possible to > > verify a given copy of 'validate' as being correct, buyt still distribute > > it as free software. > > > This is already the plan. The tarball of the validation suite will be > found along with a README.lcs-validate that will give the md5 sum for the > tarball to ensure the proper result. with this tarball the user or system admin is on the save side. > I know that technically this is software, but I suggest that it is far > more like a pgp key. Do you see any advantage in being able to change the > contents of the developers keyring? Is there any reason why it should be > DFSG compliant? I see this validation suite as serving the same purpose. > It can't serve that purpose and be totally free in the DFSG terms. I can change the public pgp code! But this key is not usefull. Like the Program and the data-files from the lcs projekt. And I can change the keyring. I can remove keys and add keys and I have one usefull keyring. If I like make a verify of a superset from the lcs files, I like to add new data entries to the data file and make a verify run... -- Michael Bramer - a Debian Certified Linux Developer http://www.debian.org PGP: finger grisu@master.debian.org -- Linux Sysadmin -- Use Debian Linux
Attachment:
pgpMFQVlHLERp.pgp
Description: PGP signature