[Mageia-sysadm] Main tasks for the next days

Wed Nov 17 22:22:08 CET 2010

Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org> writes:
+
+> So, my own analysis :
+>
+> If the name is displayed in a released product to identify it, yes, this
+> is problematic. In the rpm name, in the interface like "mandriva control
+> center" in title or "about page", in the documentation.
+
+Agreed
+
+> If the name is used in email, or for copyright notice, then we need to
+> keep it ( as doing otherwise would be seen as copyright violation ).
+
+Yes
+
+> If the name is used in a comment, in a procedure or variable name, or in
+> a url for technical reason, I do not think it need to be removed
+> ( except for technical reason, obviously ). 
+
+Agreed as well
+
+> Now, the tricky part : 
+> If we have a file in svn that would display the name in such a way that
+> would be used as brand, it this a problem ?
+>
+> I think it is not, as long as we do not distribute this as a product
+> ( ie, release a tarball ), nor encourage people to use the old version
+> ( ie if we say "use the old svn version as the feature are much better
+> with all unfixed bug" ). We will be clearly doing the contrary, ie
+> distribute fixed software ( with fixed meaning without actively using
+> Mandriva name in such a way that we will use it as a brand, distribute
+> mean "putting a tarball on our server" ) and push usually the latest
+> version. 
+
+If the SVN is public and contain packages like mandriva-release, that's
+opening the door for potential troubles.
+I think we should not take risk, and start cleaning packages of the
+Mandriva name in a private SVN, and only make public a new SVN repo
+starting from the cleaned packages, without any reference to previous
+Mandriva stuff.
+
+> Hearst lawyers didn't asked to remove the name from svn/cvs afaik.
+> Neither did mozilla asked Debian to do so for the mozilla/iceweasel
+> case. 
+
+Doesn't mean it won't happen for us :)
+
+> For example, let's take urpmi :
+> [misc at virgo ~] $ grep -i -s  mandriva $(rpm -ql urpmi) | grep -v
+> Copyright
+>
+> I removed Copyright because that's legal mention that IMO we need to
+> keep.
+>
+> And so it give :
+> /usr/share/doc/urpmi/NEWS is not using the mark ( 2 links and 2
+> explanation upon a new feature about mandriva kernel ), this is ot used
+> as a distinctive sign.
+>
+> /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/urpm.pm
+> used in the description of the tool.
+>
+> urpm - Mandriva perl tools to handle the urpmi database
+>
+> this one is likely be something we will need to change if we distribute
+> the module. 
+
+Ok
+
+> /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/urpm/cfg.pm
+> -> url to the mirror, can be kept in svn ( but need to be changed to
+> work again )
+>
+>
+> /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/urpm/media.pm
+>
+> $distribconf->settree('mandriva');
+>
+> name is used as a constant, this is not displayed anywhere. Therefore,
+> no problem in keeping it in the history.
+>
+> /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/urpm/mirrors.pm
+>
+> -> a procedure called    _mandriva_mirrorlist. Not a trademark
+> violation, as this is never displayed. It should be indeed changed to be
+> cleaner.
+> And some urls used by the procedure.
+
+I would feel safer if all these get burried and don't appear on our
+public website (viewvc).
+
+> /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/urpm/msg.pm
+>
+> a comment telling this come from svn.mandriva.com. Not a trademark
+> violation.
+>
+> So basically, for urpmi ( a old version ), the only thing to change is
+> the documentation. And as long as we do not distribute it ( ie, in a
+> package or in a tarball ), I think it is not used as a distinctive
+> sign. 
+>
+> I will also add that Mandriva is a trademark, but mdv and mdk are not.
+>
+> Therefore, except the various mandriva-foo-config ( who are more
+> configuration than software ) and rpm-mandriva-setup, the software name
+> will likely not be a problem.
+
+Yep
+Same for drakx
+
+> Now, if we decide that we also need to clean svn, we can use git and
+> tailor to do some trick to clean the source code ( ie, in the case of
+> urpmi, remove the name mandriva from the pod documentation ).
+
+We can start working in a private svn to clean the Mandriva references,
+and only publish the last revision, containing a completely clean repo
+
+-- 
+Olivier Blin - blino
+