markj@cloaked.freeserve.co.uk writes:
I now have a contact in the Smoothwall team who is willing to take a list of questions and follow it through [...]
Hi all. I've just had a disagreeable email from Richard Morrell, so please be aware that he is reading this somehow, most likely via the FSFE discussion list. I don't think this should stop that discussion: I have no problem with him seeing us think; indeed it might give a speedier resolution to this situation if he is willing to answer the points here as they arise.
There have been some additional events today: the 0.9.9 beta source has been released to the web site, although I'm not clear whether this is the entire source to everything on the ISO, as it seems very small. Perhaps someone can verify that and let us know? Alex? If not, are there details of how to obtain the sources? I think that would satisfy the licences too. The extra conditions on smoothwall also seem to have been removed, so it may now be GPL. I can't tell whether these changes are being applied to older available versions too.
Also, "Brian Youmans, FSF copyright clerk" has answered some of the points lodged with FSF, unknown to us here on the FSFE list. Maybe the best thing we can do is to download, examine and provide detailed information to FSF and FSFE, rather than try to lead in any way? Clearly there are more people involved than it first appears.
Thanks for reading!
On Wed, Aug 29, 2001 at 11:36:41PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
There have been some additional events today: the 0.9.9 beta source has been released to the web site, although I'm not clear whether this is the entire source to everything on the ISO, as it seems very small. Perhaps someone can verify that and let us know? Alex?
It is, and it isn't :) The source available on the website is not. However, the link I posted to discussion@ is, more or less. You can't build an ISO out of it directly (it doesn't contain *everything*), but it appears to be the sum total of SmoothWall minus base distribution, so you could plonk it on a RedHat fairly easily. It relies (run-time) on apache, dhcpd, et al, as well as Perl - nothing particularly out of the ordinary. The C-compilations are all very straight-forward too.
As you said, the conditions have also been removed. I think _technically_ 0.9.9b is not GPl-legal just yet - the source isn't obviously available if you didn't get my forward from Lawrence, for example - but, 0.9.8 appears to be (the licence doesn't seem to be modified), and the willingness on the part of the developers to correct these oversights seems apparent, so I think it's now just a matter of working through with them all the fine details. To be fair to them, I think they have been more concerned with getting a good release ready (I notice 0.9.9 has slid again ;), and it perhaps hasn't been getting the attention it deserves as regards licencing - as I've said before, I've offered my help in any way I can to make sure SmoothWall doesn't hit these problems again - I'm willing to spend what time/effort it needs to ensure 0.9.9 is GPL and GPl-legal if the SmoothWall guys ask for it, I don't think it will be a problem - everything needed to make it compliant has either been done or is in the process of being done, unless anyone knows any different?
Cheers,
Alex.