Charm Store Policy Update: Propritary applications usage of Terms and Resources

[Antonio Rosales]

Mark/Tom/Chuck,

Thanks for the feedback on not-scoping this to FLOSS.

On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Marco Ceppi <marco.ceppi at canonical.com> wrote:
> I don't think this needs to be scoped to just proprietary charms. It can be
> better scoped to:
>
> Any software which requires acceptance of a license or EULA has to have that
> as a term on the charm

I think most software require acceptance of the License. Perhaps the
point here is weather the acceptance has to be active or passive. If
this is the intent should the policy state:

 Any software which requires active user acceptance of a license or
EULA has to have that as a term on the charm.

> Any software which installs components from outside of a distributions
> archive needs to represent that as a resource

Nice suggestion, this also massively helps with determining will my
charm run inside my restricted firewall. I have added your suggestion
to the issue as we discuss it to also track the suggestion there

-thanks,
Antonio

>
> There are free software that require a EULA and free software not readily
> distributed and consumable in an off-line environment where you only have a
> mirror of that distros archive.
>
> Marco
>
> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 10:02 AM Charles Butler
> <charles.butler at canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm +1 to requiring terms and resources for prop. applications.
>>
>> This will effectively funnel our new onboarding efforts of these vendors
>> into the juju 2.0 path, and start them off using best practices - which will
>> really lend a hand to the robustness of their deployment (see: behind the
>> corp firewall)  As I just went through several rounds of this with our own
>> firewall setup to onboard a vendor into OIL.  Additionally it removes a
>> barrier to entry as many of these apps are behind registration walls or pay
>> walls (needs citation). Anywhere that we can ease use for our consumers I am
>> a loud +1.
>>
>> Further more, terms ensures their IP concerns are being handled
>> appropriately. You don't agree to pay? you don't get to play.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 9:28 AM Mark Shuttleworth <mark at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 26/05/16 00:21, Tom Barber wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I think Terms are good but terms for open source is overkill.
>>> >
>>> > For example if I apt install openjdk I wouldn't accept any terms
>>> > during the install process, but if I apt install oracle-jdk I would.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> Agreed, no acknowledgement of terms should be needed for FLOSS charms or
>>> resources.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> --
>>> Juju mailing list
>>> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>>
>> --
>> Juju Charmer
>> Canonical Group Ltd.
>> Ubuntu - Linux for human beings | www.ubuntu.com
>> Juju - The fastest way to model your service | www.jujucharms.com
>> --
>> Juju mailing list
>> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>
>
> --
> Juju mailing list
> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>



-- 
Antonio Rosales
Ecosystem Engineering
Canonical