Re: Lottery NEW queue (Re: Are libraries with bumped SONAME subject of inspection of ftpmaster or not
On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 10:44:37AM +0100, Gard Spreemann wrote:
> Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> writes:
> > Quoting Vincent Bernat (2022-01-25 21:38:01)
> >> I didn't comment at first because I thought someone else would raise
> >> the idea. But it seems people still like the idea of a NEW queue. Not
> >> me. The NEW queue is a hindrance.
> > I don't like current copyright laws, and I suspect a fair amount of
> > people involved in Free Software doesn't.
I for one consider copyright theft, a crime against humanity[1], and a waste
of time. Any second spent dealing with copyright is a second not spent adding
features or fixing technical bugs.
For practical reasons we have to obey the laws, no matter how oppressive
they are. But I don't see why we should do more than eg. Fedora which
has corporate backing with an actual legal team.
For those of you without a Fedora box at hand, I made a tarball:
https://angband.pl/tmp/fedora-licenses.tar.xz
This is so less than we do!
> > I just don't think the solution is to ignore copyright or licensing
> > statements.
On the other hand, "grep -r Copyright|uniq" plus a copy of non-standard
licenses would be enough.
> To me, the elephant in the room is this question: Does the way the NEW
> queue currently works provide good (good enough?) assurances to
> ourselves that we are *not* ignoring copyright or licensing?
I think the NEW review is much needed, and currently grossly inadequate
-- and that's because 95% of the FTPmaster time being spent on copyright
crap rather than technical matters.
Meow!
[1]. The needs of a human go into two groups: 1. those shared with
non-human animals (food, air, freedom, shelter, reproduction, not being
killed, not being hurt, etc), and 2. those dependant on transmission
of ideas. And transmission of ideas is directly hindered by copyright.
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Ash nazg durbatulûk,
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ ash nazg gimbatul,
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ ash nazg thrakatulûk
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
Reply to: