From wk at gnupg.org Mon Nov 4 09:10:17 2013 From: wk at gnupg.org (Werner Koch) Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 09:10:17 +0100 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: <8738nlx3kv.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> (Werner Koch's message of "Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:22:08 +0100") References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <8738nlx3kv.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: <87mwlkk2om.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Hi! it is now a week since my last mail to Richard and I have received no response on that. I conclude that the FSF (i.e. Richard Stallman) does not agree to a license change. Thus we need to help ourselves. amk offered to write a new manual from scratch and Mike indicated that he is willing to terminate his copyright agreement so that he regains the rights on his parts of the GPH. I briefly checked the status of the GPH and at the very least the version included with GnuPG 1.0.0 (1998) was written by Mike with two smaller contributions. The ChangeLog shows that the English version had only minor updates by me and one other contributor. The GNU copyright list has specific entries for Mike's assignment and for the Japanese translator. However, the GPH is filed as part of GNUPG and thus it is possible that many more authors worked on it - I doubt that, though. Inspection of the old (now offline) CVS repository should give more clarity. Given the sad state of the GNU discussion culture and its not-so-benevolent dictator, I also doubt that the GNU project is the right place for GnuPG. Shalom-Salam, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 204 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wk at gnupg.org Mon Nov 4 18:20:07 2013 From: wk at gnupg.org (Werner Koch) Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 18:20:07 +0100 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Mon, 04 Nov 2013 10:31:21 -0500") References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <8738nlx3kv.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87mwlkk2om.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: <87li14f5iw.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> On Mon, 4 Nov 2013 16:31, rms at gnu.org said: > A couple of messages ago, you asked me to show "good will", but I've > never shown you any bad will. You are asking me to make a license > change, and you haven't convinced me, but does that make me a dictator? You tried to convince me to keep on using the GFDL despite that the whole point of this discussion is that the GFDL is not suitable for our documentation purposes. The topic is ?Please agree to license change? and not ?We want to discuss which license is better?. During the lengthy discussions we have had at the gpd list for about two years, you quite clearly stated that you are the only one to decide and that for certain topics there will be no room for any discussion - not even at the internal GNU lists. > If we disagree about the right license to use, or the best way to > resolve a certain question, does it have to mean hostility? Well, you may feel like being treated hostile but so are the authors whom you refuse to grant the simple favor of changing to a different copyleft license. I do not want to repeat a discussion which is as old as the GFDL and which outcome has almost always (except for Wikipedia) been your refusal to drop the GFDL. Too bad, how how many friends of free software have been alienated from the GNU project due to the politburo alike management style of the FSF. I am not sure whether there is still a chance for Perestroika. Shalom-Salam, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz. From rms at gnu.org Mon Nov 4 16:31:21 2013 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 10:31:21 -0500 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: <87mwlkk2om.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> (message from Werner Koch on Mon, 04 Nov 2013 09:10:17 +0100) References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <8738nlx3kv.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87mwlkk2om.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. I am slow to respond to your messages because they have a lot of anger in them. It would be easy to respond by getting angry, but that wouldn't make things better. To respond in a way that might lead to more good will is difficult, and not obvious how to do. I put off responding to your previous message until I could see how. A couple of messages ago, you asked me to show "good will", but I've never shown you any bad will. You are asking me to make a license change, and you haven't convinced me, but does that make me a dictator? If we disagree about the right license to use, or the best way to resolve a certain question, does it have to mean hostility? -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call. From wk at gnupg.org Thu Nov 7 22:11:18 2013 From: wk at gnupg.org (Werner Koch) Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 22:11:18 +0100 Subject: w3.gnupg.org Message-ID: <87k3gj6hop.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Hi, http://w3.gnupg.org is a preview of the new web infrastructure; i.e. the result of the migration from WML to org-mode. It is not pretty but the all content should be there and it is a good starting point for a redesign. The source is in the gnupg-doc repository. Despite that I don't like tracking tools, Sam was able to convince me that we need Piwik to get up a better and easier accessible site. If you run with javascript disabled (as everyone should ), you won't be tracked. Shalom-Salam, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz. From rms at gnu.org Mon Nov 11 07:52:21 2013 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 01:52:21 -0500 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: <87li14f5iw.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> (message from Werner Koch on Mon, 04 Nov 2013 18:20:07 +0100) References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <8738nlx3kv.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87mwlkk2om.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87li14f5iw.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. You tried to convince me to keep on using the GFDL despite that the whole point of this discussion is that the GFDL is not suitable for our documentation purposes. The topic is Please agree to license change and not We want to discuss which license is better . The topic you had in mind was "Please agree to license change", but you did not present much of an argument for the change. You didn't even try to convince me. It didn't matter to you whether I agreed. Since you've decided to write a new manual, and you want to release it under a disjunction of licenses, please include the GFDL as one of the options in the disjunction. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call. From rms at gnu.org Tue Nov 19 07:04:21 2013 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 01:04:21 -0500 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: <87li14f5iw.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> (message from Werner Koch on Mon, 04 Nov 2013 18:20:07 +0100) References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <8738nlx3kv.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87mwlkk2om.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87li14f5iw.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: Since you've decided to write a new manual, and you want to release it under a disjunction of licenses, please include the GFDL as one of the options in the disjunction. This will make its text compatible for use in our other manuals. Ok? -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call. From rms at gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:19:42 2013 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:19:42 -0000 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: <87iowpdaes.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> (message from Werner Koch on Tue, 22 Oct 2013 09:36:43 +0200) References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87iowpdaes.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. > No, you didn't. You only made a general statement that you > think CC-BY-SA|GPL would solve some kinds of problems. > I don't think it would help at all. Feel free to have a different opinion on that. It's not a matter of opinion. Based on my knowledge of licenses, this is my conclusion. I've invited you to show evidence that I'm mistaken, but if you don't show me evidence, I will stand by my conclusion. Please tell me the names of the GPL-covered HOWTOs that you want to use code from, and the FSF will find someone to work on getting them relicensed, so you won't have to do this work. We can find a solution for using text from the GPH in magazines, but Wikipedia is out of luck. It was their choice to stop using the GFDL. They can't use the GPL-covered HOWTOs either. While asking people to relicense them, I could ask them to switch to GFDL|CC-SA; then it would work for Wikipedia too. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call. From rms at gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:19:48 2013 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:19:48 -0000 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> (message from Werner Koch on Mon, 21 Oct 2013 12:33:10 +0200) References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. FWIW, Gpg4win manual is also under the FDL but the German goverment, as copyright holder, agreed to work on a license change. Please don't ask them to do that. As a public rejection of our lciense, that would hurt the GNU Project as a whole. And it would not help. As I explained in the other message, I don't think it would solve any of the practical problems. There are many solutions to a problem like this. I looking for a solution that doesn't hurt us -- it may take some extra work, but it will be good in every sense. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call. From rms at gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:19:58 2013 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:19:58 -0000 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> (message from Werner Koch on Mon, 21 Oct 2013 12:33:10 +0200) References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. > What is the legal status of the FAQ? Who are the contributors? Copyright (C) 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02111, USA This file is free software; as a special exception the author gives unlimited permission to copy and/or distribute it, with or without modifications, as long as this notice is preserved. This license permits reusing the material under the GFDL. Copyright assignments have never been requested, though. We can make exceptions about copyright assignments for parts of a work, so let's make an exception for the FAQ material. (It probably needs substantial rewriting to become good text for a manual -- so you won't be using it verbatim.) > Likewise for the HOWTOS that you want to use. Some are GPL, other are all permissive. The ones that are all permissive, we can copy from. For the ones that are GPL, could you identify the text that you want to use? When we see how much it is, we can decide what to do. Perhaps rewrite it. Perhaps ask the authors to cooperate. > Could you explain why you think that license is desirable? I already did that: No, you didn't. You only made a general statement that you think CC-BY-SA|GPL would solve some kinds of problems. I don't think it would help at all. So let's investigate it concretely. Could you tell me one work that you think you could include, if you switched the manual to CC-BY-SA|GPL, but could not include now? What license does that work carry now? We have lots of new texts readiliy available but can't include them due the the license conflict. I don't think the change you are asking for would solve any of the conflicts. With a specific case to examine, we will know for certain. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call. From rms at gnu.org Tue Nov 26 17:20:04 2013 From: rms at gnu.org (Richard Stallman) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 16:20:04 -0000 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> (message from Werner Koch on Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:09:56 +0200) References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: [ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider [ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, [ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. Up until now such updates did not happen because the restrictive terms of the FDL made it hard to include content from other sources (HOWTOS, FAQ, etc.) or re-use parts of the GPH elsewhere (FAQ). What is the legal status of the FAQ? Who are the contributors? What license does it carry, and how was that chosen? Likewise for the HOWTOS that you want to use. Thus I like to ask for a license change of the GPH to CC-by-sa/GPLv3. Could you explain why you think that license is desirable? What is the problem you think it would solve? I doubt it would really solve the problem; I suspect there is a mistake. But until I see the details, I can't be certain. I think it will be necessary to write new text with the pertinent information; but first let's try contacting the people who wrote the text you want to use and get their permission. Those who wrote small changes in that text, we need not ask. -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation 51 Franklin St Boston MA 02110 USA www.fsf.org www.gnu.org Skype: No way! That's nonfree (freedom-denying) software. Use Ekiga or an ordinary phone call. From wk at gnupg.org Tue Nov 26 17:40:55 2013 From: wk at gnupg.org (Werner Koch) Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:40:55 +0100 Subject: License change for the GPH. In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Tue, 19 Nov 2013 01:04:21 -0500") References: <87r4bjgim3.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87zjq2ewwp.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <8738nlx3kv.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87mwlkk2om.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <87li14f5iw.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Message-ID: <87fvqji0a0.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> Hi Richard, first of all I have to apologize that your mails to gnupg-doc didn't showed up there. It was not my intention to censor any messages. In fact, I didn't noticed that they didn't made it to gnupg-doc because my own mail setup sorts such mails into the gnupg-doc folder and removes the CCed duplicates. Thus only when someone else pointed me to the fact that your mails are missing in the gnupg-doc archives, I realized that I must have accidentally deleted them while cleaning up the thousands of spam messages stacked up over the last months in the gnupg-doc folder. Meanwhile, I whitelisted you for gnupg-doc and also resent the missing mails (which unfortunately end ob in the wrong month of the archives because Pipermail sorts them by receiving date). This accident might well have been the reason for some of our communication problems. I am sorry about this. On Tue, 19 Nov 2013 07:04, rms at gnu.org said: > Since you've decided to write a new manual, and you want to release > it under a disjunction of licenses, please include the GFDL > as one of the options in the disjunction. > > This will make its text compatible for use in our other manuals. In principle I won't disagree here for a long manual; it is a bit of extra work but that should be okay. It is up to the actual authors whether they will do that. What I do not understand is that we asked you to re-license the existing GPH and - from my understanding - you rejected that but then asked that we should do the GNU project a favor and add the GFDL as one of the licenses for a new GPH. Salam-Shalom, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.