[es] - Jos jedan harpun u celo FOSSa

Nedeljko
Nedeljko Stefanović

Član broj: 314
Poruke: 8632
89.216.32.*

+2790 Profil

^{08.03.2011. u 12:54 - pre 160 meseci}

Ja ne znam ni za jedan distro koji je 100% GPL, već se koriste i druge licence za pojedine pakete.

Da je RHEL 100% bilo slobodan u smislu definicije fondacije ya slobodan softver, bilo otvoren u smislu definicije inicijative za otvoreni kod, on bi bio redistributivan, tj. svako ko ga nabavi legalnim putem bi mogao legalno da ga obesi na internet i distribuira dalje. Međutim, to očigledno nije slučaj.

Nije bitno koji su zaključci izvučeni, već kako se do njih došlo.

Odgovor na temu

mulaz
Ljubljana

Član broj: 47602
Poruke: 2239
212.235.185.*

Jabber: mulaz@elitesecurity.org
Sajt: www.mulaz.org

+184 Profil

Re: Jos jedan harpun u celo FOSSa

^{08.03.2011. u 18:51 - pre 160 meseci}

^

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CentOS

> CentOS developers use Red Hat's source code to create a final product very similar to Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Red Hat's branding and logos are changed because Red Hat does not allow them to be redistributed.[4]

Bolje ispasti glup nego iz aviona
http://www.mulaz.org/

Odgovor na temu

JPF
Beograd

Član broj: 3542
Poruke: 37
*.ptt.rs.

+2 Profil

Re: Jos jedan harpun u celo FOSSa

^{08.03.2011. u 18:55 - pre 160 meseci}

Citat:

Nedeljko: Da, stvarno, gde mogu da kinem RHEL DVD? Naravno da RHEL nije FOSS.

ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redha...nterprise/5Server/en/os/SRPMS/

Odgovor na temu

Nedeljko
Nedeljko Stefanović

Član broj: 314
Poruke: 8632
*.mts.telekom.rs.

+2790 Profil

Re: Jos jedan harpun u celo FOSSa

^{08.03.2011. u 21:02 - pre 160 meseci}

Citat:

Red Hat Enterprise Linux:

Verbatim copying and redistribution of the entire Red Hat Enterprise Linux distribution is not permitted due to trademark restrictions.

Dakle, RHEL nije redistributivan (zbog žigova, a ne softvera, svejedno), pa ga ne treba ni uzimati kao primer FOSS-a.

Nije bitno koji su zaključci izvučeni, već kako se do njih došlo.

Odgovor na temu

mulaz
Ljubljana

Član broj: 47602
Poruke: 2239
212.235.185.*

Jabber: mulaz@elitesecurity.org
Sajt: www.mulaz.org

+184 Profil

Re: Jos jedan harpun u celo FOSSa

^{09.03.2011. u 18:36 - pre 160 meseci}

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

>“Free software” is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you should think of “free” as in “free speech,” not as in “free beer.”

>“Free software” does not mean “noncommercial.” A free program must be available for commercial use, commercial development, and commercial distribution. Commercial development of free software is no longer unusual; such free commercial software is very important. You may have paid money to get copies of free software, or you may have obtained copies at no charge. But regardless of how you got your copies, you always have the freedom to copy and change the software, even to sell copies.

>When talking about free software, it is best to avoid using terms like “give away” or “for free,” because those terms imply that the issue is about price, not freedom. Some common terms such as “piracy” embody opinions we hope you won't endorse. See Confusing Words and Phrases that are Worth Avoiding for a discussion of these terms. We also have a list of proper translations of “free software” into various languages.

Software jeste free (as in speech)... artwork i ime nije.

Bolje ispasti glup nego iz aviona
http://www.mulaz.org/

Odgovor na temu

Nedeljko
Nedeljko Stefanović

Član broj: 314
Poruke: 8632
*.mts.telekom.rs.

+2790 Profil

Re: Jos jedan harpun u celo FOSSa

^{09.03.2011. u 19:00 - pre 160 meseci}

Ja od filozofije više cenim precizne definicije.

Citat:

The Free Software Definition:

Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software. More precisely, it means that the program's users have the four essential freedoms:

- The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
- The freedom to study how the program works, and change it to make it do what you wish (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
- The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
- The freedom to distribute copies of your modified versions to others (freedom 3). By doing this you can give the whole community a chance to benefit from your changes. Access to the source code is a precondition for this.

Ako paket kao celina nije redistributivan, onda kao celina nije slobodan.

Nije bitno koji su zaključci izvučeni, već kako se do njih došlo.

Odgovor na temu