[Mageia-dev] Mirror layout

Fri Dec 10 20:26:32 CET 2010

Romain d'Alverny a écrit :
+>
+> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 16:35, Wolfgang Bornath<molch.b at googlemail.com>  wrote:
+>> Isn't this what this whole discussion is about? There ARE legal issues
+>> with some software users regard as "must have". Now, how do you avoid
+>> these issues?
+>
+> To summarize, strategies:
+>   1. ignore the issues and see what happens;
+>   2. ignore the less significant ones;
+>   3. get to know each of these and manage case by case
+>   4. other?
+>
+> and factor whenever possible and see what happens, update, repeat.
+>
+> 1. and 2. are more radical, but are some sort of trial-and-error, risk
+> management strategies. Ok... looking at it this way won't lead us
+> further I guess.
+>
+> Let's try this: what if we consider, at first, that software patents
+> were a non-issue? (that is, we just consider they are all invalid as
+> such).
+>
+> How would this change/simplify the problem?
+
+Good approach.
+
+>   - for packaging/shipping the distribution
+
+Evidently easier to package.  (One less consideration.)
+As well, the problem doesn't exist in France, so Mageia itself won't be 
+a target.
+As I understand, basically only the editors of software have been 
+pursued in patent-affected countries like the U.S.
+(And basically only those with lots of money.)
+
+>   - for mirroring it
+
+Easier if mirrors don't have to consider OPTIONAL repositories.
+(But the NUMBER of repositories doesn't matter.)
+
+Theoretically it would affect mirrors in countries with patents.
+Except that in the U.S., one of the most patent-affected countries, 
+there is no shortage of mirrors, many of which carry patented software 
+that is being actively pursued against other parties - but the mirrors 
+themselves are left untouched.
+
+Note that having identifiable patent-affected repositories would 
+presumably increase the probability of patent pursuits against a mirror.
+But the PLF, with openly identified patent-affected packages, has 
+several mirrors in the U.S., none of which has been pursued, to my 
+knowledge.
+
+As well, there are countries free of software patents on every 
+continent, in the event that problems arise.
+So hosting patent-affected software seems to be a non-issue for mirrors.
+
+>   - for using it.
+
+It doesn't seem that any individual user has been pursued for using 
+unauthorised patent-affected software.
+So using patent-affected software is a non-issue for users.
+(Unless they choose to avoid such software, of course.)
+
+> (please don't go "but there _are_ software patents" for now)
+(But such arguments are "so much fun" ;) )
+
+> Romain
+
+- André
+
+