[TriLUG] Fwd: [The FSF Europe recommends: avoid SourceForge (fwd)]
Jon Carnes
jonc at nc.rr.com
Mon Nov 12 13:31:18 EST 2001
Kevin, I would like to donate a disk to FA, which would be easiest to put
in: IDE or SCSI?
Jon
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin - The Alchemist - Sonney" <alchemist at darkcanvas.com>
To: "Group, Triangle Linux Users" <trilug at trilug.org>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 12:36 PM
Subject: [TriLUG] Fwd: [The FSF Europe recommends: avoid SourceForge (fwd)]
> Many of you may have seen this. I'd like to set up some hosting for
> local projects on fatalpha, but we don't ave the man power/man hours
> to do so with the current admin group (me, Jonc, Mike)
>
> If anyone wants to volunteer to help us set up a "project repository"
> on fatalpha, please give a shout.
>
> (oh, and you can export the projects from sourceforge CVS :
>
> cvs -d repository-path export -D 11/15/01 project-name
>
> so it's just the web-based export that's honked, I guess)
>
> ----- Forwarded message from "Daniel E. Singer" <des at cs.duke.edu> -----
>
> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 12:20:37 -0500 (EST)
> From: "Daniel E. Singer" <des at cs.duke.edu>
> To: NC*SA Email List <ncsa-discussion at ncsysadmin.org>
> Subject: The FSF Europe recommends: avoid SourceForge (fwd)
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: FSF Europe <team at fsfeurope.org>
> To: discussion at fsfeurope.org
> Cc: announce at fsfeurope.org
> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 13:37:19 +0100
> Subject: The FSF Europe recommends: avoid SourceForge
>
>
> The FSF Europe recommends: start avoiding SourceForge and use
> alternative services instead!
>
>
> Loïc Dachary: SourceForge drifting
>
> [permanent URL of this document:
> http://fsfeurope.org/news/article2001-10-20-01.en.html]
>
> Over the past few months the SourceForge development facility, which
> hosts a large number of Free Software projects, has changed its
> policies. Features for exporting a project from SourceForge have been
> removed. The implementation used to be exclusively Free Software but
> is now based on non-free software. Finally, VA Linux[1] has become
> rather underhand in their attempts to grasp exclusive control of
> contributors' work.
>
> SourceForge did a lot of good for the Free Software community, but
> it's now time to break free.
>
>
> * Locking users in a non-free software world
>
> SourceForge brought to Free Software a unified and standard
> development methodology based on modern tools. Before SourceForge,
> such tools (bug tracking, cvs, web, support, forums, polls, news,
> etc.) were available individually, but few developers used many of
> them together, because they had to set up the combined facilities on
> their own. SourceForge made the combination conveniently available for
> both new and experienced developers.
>
> Because of the convenience of SourceForge, many Free Software
> developers have come to take this collection of features for granted,
> and would be reluctant to go back to the old way of doing things.
> Unfortunately, this means that when SourceForge itself takes a turn
> for the worse, it tends to pull Free Software developers down with it.
>
> The second important thing SourceForge did was to provide this
> environment based exclusively on Free Software. By doing this,
> SourceForge not only provided a powerful methodology for the Free
> Software community, it also demonstrated what Free Software could do,
> and promoted the use of Free Software. And since the special software
> for SourceForge was itself free, anyone could set up a similar site.
> The SourceForge software became permanently available to developers
> everywhere. Developers in (say) India who can't afford the bandwidth
> to use the SourceForge site could have the benefit of the same
> features on their own server.
>
> In August 2001, VA Linux reversed those policies and introduced
> non-free software on the SourceForge server. In announcing this, Larry
> Augustin (VA Linux CEO) claims that SourceForge.net users will "see
> virtually no changes." That may be true if they narrow their vision
> and consider only what job the site does and how to operate it. But
> when we consider the implications, things are very different now.
> Instead of a showcase for Free Software, SourceForge is now a demo
> site for non-free software. There is a danger that the many thousands
> of people registered on SourceForge will become increasingly hooked on
> the SourceForge site and on features implemented by proprietary
> software.
>
> As a Free Software developer, you are still free to use the
> SourceForge server, but you won't have the freedom to copy, modify,
> study and distribute the software it runs; you won't be free to set up
> a similar site yourself, or adapt it to your own needs. The last
> published release of the SourceForge software is one year old.
>
> The move to non-free software was the culmination of a series of steps
> designed to lock users in. There never was a way to fully extract
> projects from SourceForge, but efforts were made in this
> direction--then this year they were removed. At present the only
> things you can get are the CVS tree and tracker data
> /export/sf_tracker_export.php. Few people are aware of the latter
> because it is undocumented. The export page explains how to use
> scripts that don't exist anymore; implementation of facilities to ease
> project extraction was stopped. The developer community is
> exclusively made of VA Linux employees and a few people who are asked
> not to disclose the current code.
>
> The mailing lists archives, a major service of SourceForge recently
> became unmaintained. Will it be replaced by a non-free software based
> solution ?
>
>
> * Contributors' work appropriation
>
> Here is what happened to me shortly before the announcement that
> SourceForge would use and develop non-free software. Because I'm
> listed as a contributor (in the sources and documentation) to the
> SourceForge software, I received a request from VA Linux to assign
> copyright to them. I was not surprised or unhappy with this; many
> Free Software projects ask contributors to assign copyright of their
> changes to the main author. Assigning copyright to a single holder is
> a strategy for defending the GNU GPL more effectively, and I would
> have been happy to cooperate in that regard.
>
> But when I read the details of their copyright assignment, I saw major
> problems. I was asked to assign copyright of my work that "is, or may
> in the future be, utilized in the SourceForge collaborative software
> development platform". The assignment was not limited to my
> contribution to the SourceForge code, it potentially covered all my
> past and future work if it was of some interest to SourceForge.
>
> I was also expecting a promise that my work would be released under
> the GNU GPL, but the assignment said nothing about Free Software. VA
> Linux would be allowed to release the software I wrote under a
> non-free software license and not let the community have it at all.
> But I wasn't sure at the time if this was a real concern, because VA
> Linux only produced and used Free Software. Two weeks later they
> decided to introduce non-free software on SourceForge and that cast a
> different light on the question.
>
> VA Linux told me that they only sent the assignment to two people, in
> the hope to refine it. We started a long discussion that lasted two
> months. I assumed this discussion was to make the copyright
> assignment more palatable to the Free Software community, so I worked
> hard to give constructive feedback. Finally I was sent the version of
> the copyright assignment produced by the legal department. I quote it
> here in its entirety:
>
> SourceForge Copyright Assignment
>
> Thank you for your interest in contributing software code to
> SourceForge.
>
> In order for us to include the code in our product, we will
> need you to provide us with the rights to the code.
>
> By signing this agreement, you, the undersigned, hereby assign
> to VA Linux all right, title and interest in and to the
> software code described below, and all copyright, patent,
> proprietary information, trade secret, and other intellectual
> property rights therein. You also agree to take all actions and
> sign all documents (such as copyright assignments or
> registrations) reasonably requested by VA Linux to evidence and
> record the above assignments.
>
> This was even more of a power grab than the first draft. "You give us
> total control; we promise nothing". At this point, I knew that the
> attempts to clarify the copyright assignment were a waste of time; VA
> Linux clearly wasn't collecting copyright assignments in order to
> enforce the GNU GPL.
>
>
> * Escape entrapment
>
> It's time for people who value freedom to escape from SourceForge. It
> has become a tar pit from which escape will become increasingly
> difficult. Development hosting platforms based completely on Free
> Software flourish all over the world. You can create your own, join
> an existing one or help write the underlying software. Some months ago
> I helped to launch Savannah for the GNU project because I felt the
> need of a collaboratively run platform. With friends and
> co-developpers we are now re-writing and packaging distributed
> development hosting software. The idea is to be able to install and
> operate a SourceForge-like site within hours. Savannah will run this
> software at the end of this year. At first it may have less
> functionality than SourceForge, but it has a bright future because it
> is rooted in a cooperative effort of people sharing Free Software.
>
> SourceForge is free as in free beer because it was designed this
> way. It was a very expensive and ephemeral gift to the Free Software
> community. We could resent VA Linux for such a poisoned gift. On the
> contrary I think we should thank them. They brought us methodology,
> and taught us that a development hosting facility must be built in a
> distributed and collaborative way, not by a single company controlling
> everything from top to bottom. Of course that means everyone needs to
> spend a little time developing and maintaining these hosting
> facilities. We've finished our beer, it's time to win our freedom.
>
> Loïc Dachary
>
>
> [1] VA Linux is the owner of the SourceForge domain name, provides and
> owns the hardware, pays for the bandwidth, hire people maintaining
> SourceForge. VA Linux is also the owner of most sites, the largest
> concentration of Free Software related resources in the hands of a
> single company.
> _______________________________________________
> Announce mailing list
> Announce at fsfeurope.org
> http://mailman.fsfeurope.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/announce
>
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------
> -- Kevin "The Alchemist" Sonney --
> -- New email : alchemist at darkcanvas.com --
> -- http://www.darkcanvas.com/~alchemist --
> -- ICQ: 4855069 AIM: ksonney --
> --------------------------------------------
>
> "If you'll read the subtext for many of those old strips, you'll find
> the heart of an old-fashioned Libertarian. And I'd be a Libertarian,
> if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners."
> -- Berkley Breathed, 2001
> _______________________________________________
> TriLUG mailing list
> http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
More information about the TriLUG
mailing list