Re: Bug#1049999: vagrant: the future of packaging vagrant in Debian
- To: Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>, 1049999@bugs.debian.org
- Cc: Kentaro HAYASHI <kenhys@xdump.org>, Gwili.Stifter@easymailer.live, debian-ruby@lists.debian.org, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@eds.org>, Laurent Bigonville <bigon@debian.org>, Kienan Stewart <kienan.stewart@burntworld.ca>, Gabriel Filion <gabriel@koumbit.org>, Lucas Kanashiro <kanashiro@debian.org>
- Subject: Re: Bug#1049999: vagrant: the future of packaging vagrant in Debian
- From: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 01:46:11 +0200
- Message-id: <ZOaaQ3cystMmw1D/@thunder.hadrons.org>
- Mail-followup-to: Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>, Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>, 1049999@bugs.debian.org, Kentaro HAYASHI <kenhys@xdump.org>, Gwili.Stifter@easymailer.live, debian-ruby@lists.debian.org, Hans-Christoph Steiner <hans@eds.org>, Laurent Bigonville <bigon@debian.org>, Kienan Stewart <kienan.stewart@burntworld.ca>, Gabriel Filion <gabriel@koumbit.org>, Lucas Kanashiro <kanashiro@debian.org>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] ZN9RABM5ofk8pgzX@debian.org>
- References: <20230818145628.516f5bf8@jet> <[🔎] ZN9RABM5ofk8pgzX@debian.org>
Hi!
On Fri, 2023-08-18 at 08:07:44 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote:
> FWIW, I have been maintaining vagrant in Debian for several years.
BTW, thank you for having done that, it's been much appreciated!
> TL;DR: I will not be maintaining vagrant anymore.
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 02:56:28PM +0900, Kentaro HAYASHI wrote:
> > * What was the outcome of this action?
> > Plan A.
[…]
> > Plan B.
[…]
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 09:37:54AM +0000, Gwili.Stifter@EasyMailer.live wrote:
> > Plan C.
[…]
There's perhaps a:
Plan D.
- Package Vagrunt (https://github.com/vaagrunt/vagrunt) a fork of
Vagrant, that is stated should remain free software. And as it does
not have a CLA, if it gets several contributions it will be
increasingly hard to relicense.
- Transition from vagrant to vagrunt via a transitional package.
(We use Vagrant at work, and I'm not planning on relying on a non-free
tool, so a fork would do, otherwise I'd have to look into alternatives
for us to switch to.)
> Hopefully, being burned a second time will teach me to not put my
> volunteer time in non-copyleft packages provided by a single
> corporation.
While it's certainly true that contributing into a project with
single-corp-control + non-copyleft has uncertain odds to take, at
least everyone is on the same footing. I think, as Lucas has mentioned,
the most problematic aspect in this kind of cases is where there are
both single-corp-control and a CLA, as that's what grants the possibility
of a relicense and this asymmetrical relationship, which could have
happened here as well even with a copyleft license. (Out of principle
I never sign CLAs for my volunteer work, with the exception of the one
for the FSF due to its nature and its assurances, but which I supposedly
rescinded some time ago anyway.)
Thanks,
Guillem
Reply to: