Double checking free/nonfree packages
Double checking free/nonfree packages
Re: Double checking free/nonfree packages
2009-12-01 06:41 UTC
Hi,
ext Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm compiling a list on the Libre Planet wiki to determine what packages
> are nonfree, and what steps would need to be taken to make the n900 a
> fully free phone:
>
> http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/FreeMaemo
Thank you! This is a nice first shot.
Can it be that we start having several iniciatives like this spread in
different places? At the end the goal is the same: Maemo as open as
technically possible being still stable and full featured.
It would be really useful to have the one and only list of closed
components prioritized by community interest. An openness backlog for
people like me to work on.
The criteria to prioritize components could be (improvising a bit, feel
free to suggest improvements):
1. Fixing a bug. I mean a real objective bug: package is in non-free
although it looks like it's actually an open piece of software.
2. Nurturing application development. There is a strong argument proving
that opening a component will bring more and better apps for end users.
3. Spread of Maemo driven technologies to other platforms. A component
fits well in a gap existing in other Linux/OSS based projects and there
is a concrete interest on collaborating and contributing to a component
if it's opened.
4. Community maintenance. A component is receiving low attention from
the official maintainers even if it has high attention from the
community and there are developers volunteering to contribute to it if
the source code is available.
5. Better architecture. Probably covered by 2 or 3 but just in case. A
closed component is sitting in the midle of open components making
things more difficult that needed to developers interested in that area.
>
> While researching this list, I found some components that are currently
> marked as nonfree here:
>
> http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Architecture/Top_Level_Architecture
Soumya and Carsten (CCed) should be able to help with the packages info.
> ... but which now appear to be free software.
>
> I've compiled a list of those components as well as some notes on them.
> I'd like to get some confirmation before I take them off the nonfree
> list:
>
>
> <questionably-nonfree-list>
>
> Calendar-backend
> ----------------
>
> Appears to be a free version of this at:
> http://maemo.gitorious.org/calendar-backend
>
>
> Gypsy daemon
> ------------
>
> Appears free to me: http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/wiki/
>
>
> Mission control
> ---------------
>
> Marked as nonfree on the graph, however irc conversation reveals:
>
> <wjt> paroneayea: MC itself is LGPL [15:13]
> <wjt> paroneayea: Maemo uses osso-mission-control, which is upstream MC plus
> some proprietary bits
>
> Any details on what these proprietary bits are, how they can be removed?
>
>
> rtcom-eventlogger
> -----------------
>
> Apparently recently freed according to:
>
> http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.html
>
>
> Funambol SyncML
> ---------------
>
> Claims "Funambol is the leading mobile open source project and leading
> provider of open source mobile cloud sync and push email for billions
> of phones."
>
> https://www.forge.funambol.org/DomainHome.html
>
> If it's "open source", is it really nonfree then?
>
> Appears to be under the AGPL?
> https://core.forge.funambol.org/source/browse/core/trunk/LICENSE.txt?revision=28308&view=markup
For what I remember, Funambol has dual licensing and we had to take the
commercial version.
>
>
> xml2wbxml
> ---------
>
> Appears to be linked to the wbxmllib project, which is under the gpl?
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/wbxmllib/develop
>
>
> CertMan
> -------
>
> Appears to be free or have a free implementation?
> http://gitorious.org/+mer/mer/certman
>
>
> OpenGL ES 2.0
> -------------
>
> Can't seem to find out details about this package
>
> There appear to be some free software implementation tests here, but
> not really usable?:
> http://www.khronos.org/developers/resources/opengles/
>
> Vincent 3d is a free software implementation?
> http://www.vincent3d.com/Vincent3D/index.html
>
> Hm, looks like the problem may be on the driver end:
> http://forum.openhandhelds.org/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=341
>
> And it does not look likely that this is free or that it will be free
> soon.
>
> Okay, this one is probably certainly non-free on the driver end
Indeed.
>
> DSME
> ----
>
> Freed according to:
> http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.htmlci
> (2009-11-13: DSME is in free).
>
>
> </questionably-nonfree-list>
>
>
> Any notes on this would be really appreciated, and would certainly help
> me improve documentation over here :)
>
> Also, does anyone have an original SVG for "Top_level_architecture.png"?
> If some of these components have been freed, I'd like to make their
> lettering black. Otherwise else I'm going to be forced to resort to
> pasting smiley faces next to the components that have been freed.
There is no problem having the source file public, but the good solution
is to simply update the source image and link to it instead of forking
it. Otherwise the chances of you having a version different to the one
in the official documentation is high, when there should not be any
reason to show anything different.
--
Quim Gil
open source advocate
Maemo Devices @ Nokia
ext Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm compiling a list on the Libre Planet wiki to determine what packages
> are nonfree, and what steps would need to be taken to make the n900 a
> fully free phone:
>
> http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/FreeMaemo
Thank you! This is a nice first shot.
Can it be that we start having several iniciatives like this spread in
different places? At the end the goal is the same: Maemo as open as
technically possible being still stable and full featured.
It would be really useful to have the one and only list of closed
components prioritized by community interest. An openness backlog for
people like me to work on.
The criteria to prioritize components could be (improvising a bit, feel
free to suggest improvements):
1. Fixing a bug. I mean a real objective bug: package is in non-free
although it looks like it's actually an open piece of software.
2. Nurturing application development. There is a strong argument proving
that opening a component will bring more and better apps for end users.
3. Spread of Maemo driven technologies to other platforms. A component
fits well in a gap existing in other Linux/OSS based projects and there
is a concrete interest on collaborating and contributing to a component
if it's opened.
4. Community maintenance. A component is receiving low attention from
the official maintainers even if it has high attention from the
community and there are developers volunteering to contribute to it if
the source code is available.
5. Better architecture. Probably covered by 2 or 3 but just in case. A
closed component is sitting in the midle of open components making
things more difficult that needed to developers interested in that area.
>
> While researching this list, I found some components that are currently
> marked as nonfree here:
>
> http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Architecture/Top_Level_Architecture
Soumya and Carsten (CCed) should be able to help with the packages info.
> ... but which now appear to be free software.
>
> I've compiled a list of those components as well as some notes on them.
> I'd like to get some confirmation before I take them off the nonfree
> list:
>
>
> <questionably-nonfree-list>
>
> Calendar-backend
> ----------------
>
> Appears to be a free version of this at:
> http://maemo.gitorious.org/calendar-backend
>
>
> Gypsy daemon
> ------------
>
> Appears free to me: http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/wiki/
>
>
> Mission control
> ---------------
>
> Marked as nonfree on the graph, however irc conversation reveals:
>
> <wjt> paroneayea: MC itself is LGPL [15:13]
> <wjt> paroneayea: Maemo uses osso-mission-control, which is upstream MC plus
> some proprietary bits
>
> Any details on what these proprietary bits are, how they can be removed?
>
>
> rtcom-eventlogger
> -----------------
>
> Apparently recently freed according to:
>
> http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.html
>
>
> Funambol SyncML
> ---------------
>
> Claims "Funambol is the leading mobile open source project and leading
> provider of open source mobile cloud sync and push email for billions
> of phones."
>
> https://www.forge.funambol.org/DomainHome.html
>
> If it's "open source", is it really nonfree then?
>
> Appears to be under the AGPL?
> https://core.forge.funambol.org/source/browse/core/trunk/LICENSE.txt?revision=28308&view=markup
For what I remember, Funambol has dual licensing and we had to take the
commercial version.
>
>
> xml2wbxml
> ---------
>
> Appears to be linked to the wbxmllib project, which is under the gpl?
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/wbxmllib/develop
>
>
> CertMan
> -------
>
> Appears to be free or have a free implementation?
> http://gitorious.org/+mer/mer/certman
>
>
> OpenGL ES 2.0
> -------------
>
> Can't seem to find out details about this package
>
> There appear to be some free software implementation tests here, but
> not really usable?:
> http://www.khronos.org/developers/resources/opengles/
>
> Vincent 3d is a free software implementation?
> http://www.vincent3d.com/Vincent3D/index.html
>
> Hm, looks like the problem may be on the driver end:
> http://forum.openhandhelds.org/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=341
>
> And it does not look likely that this is free or that it will be free
> soon.
>
> Okay, this one is probably certainly non-free on the driver end
Indeed.
>
> DSME
> ----
>
> Freed according to:
> http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.htmlci
> (2009-11-13: DSME is in free).
>
>
> </questionably-nonfree-list>
>
>
> Any notes on this would be really appreciated, and would certainly help
> me improve documentation over here :)
>
> Also, does anyone have an original SVG for "Top_level_architecture.png"?
> If some of these components have been freed, I'd like to make their
> lettering black. Otherwise else I'm going to be forced to resort to
> pasting smiley faces next to the components that have been freed.
There is no problem having the source file public, but the good solution
is to simply update the source image and link to it instead of forking
it. Otherwise the chances of you having a version different to the one
in the official documentation is high, when there should not be any
reason to show anything different.
--
Quim Gil
open source advocate
Maemo Devices @ Nokia
Re: Double checking free/nonfree packages
2009-12-01 08:07 UTC
Quoting Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>:
> While researching this list, I found some components that are currently
> marked as nonfree here:
>
> http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Architecture/Top_Level_Architecture
>
> ... but which now appear to be free software.
For good measure, that diagram is inaccurate :)
>
> I've compiled a list of those components as well as some notes on them.
> I'd like to get some confirmation before I take them off the nonfree
> list:
Did you in your research run into Mer, btw? http://wiki.maemo.org/Mer
- we strive towards having a 100% OSS platform on the software side
(our views probably differ on the HW support side but so it goes)
>
>
> <questionably-nonfree-list>
>
> Calendar-backend
> ----------------
>
> Appears to be a free version of this at:
> http://maemo.gitorious.org/calendar-backend
>
>
> Gypsy daemon
> ------------
>
> Appears free to me: http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/wiki/
>
>
> Mission control
> ---------------
>
> Marked as nonfree on the graph, however irc conversation reveals:
>
> <wjt> paroneayea: MC itself is LGPL [15:13]
> <wjt> paroneayea: Maemo uses osso-mission-control, which is upstream MC plus
> some proprietary bits
>
> Any details on what these proprietary bits are, how they can be removed?
>
>
> rtcom-eventlogger
> -----------------
>
> Apparently recently freed according to:
>
> http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.html
>
Yes, see http://repository.maemo.org/pool/maemo5.0/free/r/
>
> Funambol SyncML
> ---------------
>
> Claims "Funambol is the leading mobile open source project and leading
> provider of open source mobile cloud sync and push email for billions
> of phones."
>
> https://www.forge.funambol.org/DomainHome.html
>
> If it's "open source", is it really nonfree then?
>
> Appears to be under the AGPL?
> https://core.forge.funambol.org/source/browse/core/trunk/LICENSE.txt?revision=28308&view=markup
>
Dual-licensed, I think nokia has the commercial version
>
> xml2wbxml
> ---------
>
> Appears to be linked to the wbxmllib project, which is under the gpl?
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/wbxmllib/develop
>
>
> CertMan
> -------
> Appears to be free or have a free implementation?
> http://gitorious.org/+mer/mer/certman
That's an old version. New one is
http://repository.maemo.org/pool/maemo5.0/free/m/maemo-security-certman/ I
think.
>
>
> OpenGL ES 2.0
> -------------
>
>
> Okay, this one is probably certainly non-free on the driver end
Situation is open source kernel driver, closed source libraries.
http://www.imgtec.com/PowerVR/sgx.asp
>
>
> DSME
> ----
>
> Freed according to:
> http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.htmlci
> (2009-11-13: DSME is in free).
http://repository.maemo.org/pool/maemo5.0/free/d/dsme/
>
>
> </questionably-nonfree-list>
>
>
> While researching this list, I found some components that are currently
> marked as nonfree here:
>
> http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Architecture/Top_Level_Architecture
>
> ... but which now appear to be free software.
For good measure, that diagram is inaccurate :)
>
> I've compiled a list of those components as well as some notes on them.
> I'd like to get some confirmation before I take them off the nonfree
> list:
Did you in your research run into Mer, btw? http://wiki.maemo.org/Mer
- we strive towards having a 100% OSS platform on the software side
(our views probably differ on the HW support side but so it goes)
>
>
> <questionably-nonfree-list>
>
> Calendar-backend
> ----------------
>
> Appears to be a free version of this at:
> http://maemo.gitorious.org/calendar-backend
>
>
> Gypsy daemon
> ------------
>
> Appears free to me: http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/wiki/
>
>
> Mission control
> ---------------
>
> Marked as nonfree on the graph, however irc conversation reveals:
>
> <wjt> paroneayea: MC itself is LGPL [15:13]
> <wjt> paroneayea: Maemo uses osso-mission-control, which is upstream MC plus
> some proprietary bits
>
> Any details on what these proprietary bits are, how they can be removed?
>
>
> rtcom-eventlogger
> -----------------
>
> Apparently recently freed according to:
>
> http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.html
>
Yes, see http://repository.maemo.org/pool/maemo5.0/free/r/
>
> Funambol SyncML
> ---------------
>
> Claims "Funambol is the leading mobile open source project and leading
> provider of open source mobile cloud sync and push email for billions
> of phones."
>
> https://www.forge.funambol.org/DomainHome.html
>
> If it's "open source", is it really nonfree then?
>
> Appears to be under the AGPL?
> https://core.forge.funambol.org/source/browse/core/trunk/LICENSE.txt?revision=28308&view=markup
>
Dual-licensed, I think nokia has the commercial version
>
> xml2wbxml
> ---------
>
> Appears to be linked to the wbxmllib project, which is under the gpl?
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/wbxmllib/develop
>
>
> CertMan
> -------
> Appears to be free or have a free implementation?
> http://gitorious.org/+mer/mer/certman
That's an old version. New one is
http://repository.maemo.org/pool/maemo5.0/free/m/maemo-security-certman/ I
think.
>
>
> OpenGL ES 2.0
> -------------
>
>
> Okay, this one is probably certainly non-free on the driver end
Situation is open source kernel driver, closed source libraries.
http://www.imgtec.com/PowerVR/sgx.asp
>
>
> DSME
> ----
>
> Freed according to:
> http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.htmlci
> (2009-11-13: DSME is in free).
http://repository.maemo.org/pool/maemo5.0/free/d/dsme/
>
>
> </questionably-nonfree-list>
>
>
Re: Double checking free/nonfree packages
2009-12-01 08:54 UTC
Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> Mission control
> ---------------
>
> Marked as nonfree on the graph, however irc conversation reveals:
>
> <wjt> paroneayea: MC itself is LGPL [15:13]
> <wjt> paroneayea: Maemo uses osso-mission-control, which is upstream MC plus
> some proprietary bits
>
> Any details on what these proprietary bits are, how they can be removed?
* Special handling for emergency calls
* Handling of connectivity (libconic) events
* State management via MCE: MC tells MCE when we are in a call, and listens to
MCE signals (offline mode requires some special handling)
* Password storage is done with signon daemon.
* Missed call notifications
There is some more, but this are the most obvious things.
The proprietary components are the /usr/bin/mission-control binary and the
plugins in /usr/lib/mission-control/.
Ciao,
Alberto
--
http://www.mardy.it <-- geek in un lingua international!
--
http://www.mardy.it <-- geek in un lingua international!
> Mission control
> ---------------
>
> Marked as nonfree on the graph, however irc conversation reveals:
>
> <wjt> paroneayea: MC itself is LGPL [15:13]
> <wjt> paroneayea: Maemo uses osso-mission-control, which is upstream MC plus
> some proprietary bits
>
> Any details on what these proprietary bits are, how they can be removed?
* Special handling for emergency calls
* Handling of connectivity (libconic) events
* State management via MCE: MC tells MCE when we are in a call, and listens to
MCE signals (offline mode requires some special handling)
* Password storage is done with signon daemon.
* Missed call notifications
There is some more, but this are the most obvious things.
The proprietary components are the /usr/bin/mission-control binary and the
plugins in /usr/lib/mission-control/.
Ciao,
Alberto
--
http://www.mardy.it <-- geek in un lingua international!
--
http://www.mardy.it <-- geek in un lingua international!
Re: Double checking free/nonfree packages
2009-12-01 15:20 UTC
On Mon, 2009-11-30 at 22:16 -0600, Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm compiling a list on the Libre Planet wiki to determine what packages
> are nonfree, and what steps would need to be taken to make the n900 a
> fully free phone:
>
> http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/FreeMaemo
Hi Christopher
As another Mer person I'm also very interested in this work. Mer on any
Nokia device out today is not (and realistically has zero chance of ever
being) 100% fsf-free.
However every step the community takes in the right direction moves us
towards that milestone and I personally feel that Nokia are "doing
freedom" in a better way than most (which is one reason I'm here!)
If this is a reasonable compromise then it would be great to see this
work integrated with the maemo community efforts - IIRC there have been
other initiatives to investigate this kind of data so maybe they could
be dug up?
David
> Hello,
>
> I'm compiling a list on the Libre Planet wiki to determine what packages
> are nonfree, and what steps would need to be taken to make the n900 a
> fully free phone:
>
> http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/FreeMaemo
Hi Christopher
As another Mer person I'm also very interested in this work. Mer on any
Nokia device out today is not (and realistically has zero chance of ever
being) 100% fsf-free.
However every step the community takes in the right direction moves us
towards that milestone and I personally feel that Nokia are "doing
freedom" in a better way than most (which is one reason I'm here!)
If this is a reasonable compromise then it would be great to see this
work integrated with the maemo community efforts - IIRC there have been
other initiatives to investigate this kind of data so maybe they could
be dug up?
David
Re: Double checking free/nonfree packages
2009-12-08 11:33 UTC
ext Christopher Allan Webber wrote:
> Funambol SyncML
> ---------------
>
> Claims "Funambol is the leading mobile open source project and leading
> provider of open source mobile cloud sync and push email for billions
> of phones."
>
> https://www.forge.funambol.org/DomainHome.html
>
> If it's "open source", is it really nonfree then?
>
> Appears to be under the AGPL?
> https://core.forge.funambol.org/source/browse/core/trunk/LICENSE.txt?revision=28308&view=markup
Dual licensing. In short, the Maemo team went for the commercial license
to avoid legal risks linking open/closed components.
> xml2wbxml
> ---------
>
> Appears to be linked to the wbxmllib project, which is under the gpl?
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/wbxmllib/develop
No, it's an own implementation of the WBXML specification.
--
Quim Gil
open source advocate
Maemo Devices @ Nokia
> Funambol SyncML
> ---------------
>
> Claims "Funambol is the leading mobile open source project and leading
> provider of open source mobile cloud sync and push email for billions
> of phones."
>
> https://www.forge.funambol.org/DomainHome.html
>
> If it's "open source", is it really nonfree then?
>
> Appears to be under the AGPL?
> https://core.forge.funambol.org/source/browse/core/trunk/LICENSE.txt?revision=28308&view=markup
Dual licensing. In short, the Maemo team went for the commercial license
to avoid legal risks linking open/closed components.
> xml2wbxml
> ---------
>
> Appears to be linked to the wbxmllib project, which is under the gpl?
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/wbxmllib/develop
No, it's an own implementation of the WBXML specification.
--
Quim Gil
open source advocate
Maemo Devices @ Nokia
Christopher Allan Webber
I'm compiling a list on the Libre Planet wiki to determine what packages
are nonfree, and what steps would need to be taken to make the n900 a
fully free phone:
http://groups.fsf.org/wiki/FreeMaemo
While researching this list, I found some components that are currently
marked as nonfree here:
http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/Maemo_5_Developer_Guide/Architecture/Top_Level_Architecture
... but which now appear to be free software.
I've compiled a list of those components as well as some notes on them.
I'd like to get some confirmation before I take them off the nonfree
list:
<questionably-nonfree-list>
Calendar-backend
----------------
Appears to be a free version of this at:
http://maemo.gitorious.org/calendar-backend
Gypsy daemon
------------
Appears free to me: http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/wiki/
Mission control
---------------
Marked as nonfree on the graph, however irc conversation reveals:
<wjt> paroneayea: MC itself is LGPL [15:13]
<wjt> paroneayea: Maemo uses osso-mission-control, which is upstream MC plus
some proprietary bits
Any details on what these proprietary bits are, how they can be removed?
rtcom-eventlogger
-----------------
Apparently recently freed according to:
http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.html
Funambol SyncML
---------------
Claims "Funambol is the leading mobile open source project and leading
provider of open source mobile cloud sync and push email for billions
of phones."
https://www.forge.funambol.org/DomainHome.html
If it's "open source", is it really nonfree then?
Appears to be under the AGPL?
https://core.forge.funambol.org/source/browse/core/trunk/LICENSE.txt?revision=28308&view=markup
xml2wbxml
---------
Appears to be linked to the wbxmllib project, which is under the gpl?
http://sourceforge.net/projects/wbxmllib/develop
CertMan
-------
Appears to be free or have a free implementation?
http://gitorious.org/+mer/mer/certman
OpenGL ES 2.0
-------------
Can't seem to find out details about this package
There appear to be some free software implementation tests here, but
not really usable?:
http://www.khronos.org/developers/resources/opengles/
Vincent 3d is a free software implementation?
http://www.vincent3d.com/Vincent3D/index.html
Hm, looks like the problem may be on the driver end:
http://forum.openhandhelds.org/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=341
And it does not look likely that this is free or that it will be free
soon.
Okay, this one is probably certainly non-free on the driver end
DSME
----
Freed according to:
http://cool900.blogspot.com/2009/11/closed-source-components-in-maemo-5.htmlci
(2009-11-13: DSME is in free).
</questionably-nonfree-list>
Any notes on this would be really appreciated, and would certainly help
me improve documentation over here :)
Also, does anyone have an original SVG for "Top_level_architecture.png"?
If some of these components have been freed, I'd like to make their
lettering black. Otherwise else I'm going to be forced to resort to
pasting smiley faces next to the components that have been freed.
- cwebb