Bug#236721: Squeak in Debian main
Ben,
Ambiguity is the proper status for this RFP. While it remains so,
people should use the external Squeak/Debian distribution. It is
described as follows:
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3616
I am in the process of transfering maintainership to Matej Kosik
(kosik@fiit.stuba.sk). He (or whoever he says) should be the main point
person for future discussions of Squeak's Debian packages. While I
think Debian should include Squeak in its distribution, I do not have
time to champion that cause on the mailing lists and bug trackers.
On the RFP itself, as far as I can tell, Squeak-L fits the spirit of
DFSG, but I did not argue the case. Instead, I argued that Squeak-L is
suitable for distribution in non-free, but even there there was debate.
I spent considerable time on debian-legal, but the arguments went in
circles. Here is the main thread as best I can remember:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2004/04/msg00160.html
The following page has my notes about the discussion on debian-legal:
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3733
The one new item since that page's status is that Squeak 1.1 is now
available under APSL. This provides a separate avenue for getting some
versions of Squeak into Debian proper.
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2006-May/104466.h
tml
I will append the current summary from Swiki page 3733 cited above, just
so that they are recorded on the bug log. -Lex
--- below this line comes from Squeak Swiki page 3733 ----
This page summarizes the debate on whether Squeak will go into Debian
non-free. If it does go in, then this page will probably be added to the
package for future reference. If it does not go in, then this page will
be posted to debian-legal for the archives.
Please post any comments, questions, or objections at the bottom of the
page, or even better, comment to the debian-legal mailing list. This
way, the main content of the page has a single editor.
Nothing on this page is official in any way; it is just one person's
attempt to summarize the state of the discussion.
Status
As of April 30, 2004, Squeak is not included in Debian. Debian users can
still obtain packages for Squeak as described on Squeak for Debian
Users. There is some discussion on the debian-legal mailing list about
whether Squeak may be distributed in Debian non-free.
Non-Free versus Main
Some clauses of the Squeak-L seem to violate the DFSG. Most notably, the
export clause is an issue. Thus, while most agree that Squeak is an
extremely free and permissive license, it is not suitable for
Debian/main. Thus, the current discussion is on whether Debian will
include Squeak in non-free. To do this, Squeak-L must provide sufficient
premission, it must impose sufficiently few requirements, and it must
incur sufficiently low liability.
Issues on Particular Parts of the License
Export Restrictions
Squeak-L requires that any distribution of Squeak follows US Export Law.
Since Squeak does not include any cryptographic software, the main
requirement seems to be that Squeak not be distributed to countries
embargoed by the US.
It is still being discussed whether Debian can enforce this
satisfactorily. It has been noted that some Debian servers might already
be enforcing the restriction, but there is as yet no verification on
which servers those are.
It has been argued that mirrors of US-based servers still need to have
the same protections as the US-based servers, anyway, because US law
makes it illegal to export to someone who will then reexport to an
embargoed country. Thus we may want to adjust our servers anyway to
disallow downloads from embargoed countries.
Summary: open issue
Indemnification
In some circumstances, the license requires people who distribute
Squeak, to reimburse Apple for legal fees accrued in response to
litigation involving the distribution. However, the liability is
carefully tailored to restrict the liability: Debian would only be
liable for legal fees to the extent a suit is related to Debian's
distribution of Squeak.
Additionally, it is extremely unlikely that Apple will be sued over
Squeak at all, much much less in any way that involves Debian's
distribution of Squeak. If someone has a problem with Debian
distributing Squeak, then they are much more likely to sue Debian
directly. In fact, if someone does sue Apple over Debian's distribution,
then Apple must give Debian an offer to defend the case themselves if
they prefer; if Apple does not offer this opportunity, then Apple cannot
request legal fees.
summary: open issue
Computers under Direct Use
The license contains this text:
"2. Permitted Uses and Restrictions. This License allows you to copy,
install and use the Apple Software on an unlimited number of computers
under your direct control."
Two people have claimed that this renders Squeak non-distributable by
Debian, but the reasoning is unclear to this editor. The counterargument
is that this sentence merely grants permissions, and thus cannot be
removing permissions; two sentences later, the following text appears,
which is a good basis for having permission to distribute Squeak:
"You may distribute and sublicense such Modified Software only under the
terms of a valid, binding license that makes no representations or
warranties on behalf of Apple, and is no less protective of Apple and
Apple's rights than this License."
Furthermore, the "plain English license terms" (see Squeak-L) that Apple
posted seem to mean that they interpret their license as providing wide
permission to redistribute Squeak.
summary: open issue
Fonts
Squeak-L does not allow the included fonts to be modified or to be
included in a for-profit product. This is a non-issue, however, since it
is planned to remove these fonts before distributing Squeak in Debian.
summary: no problem
Reply to: