Canadian version of Ubuntu

Sat Aug 5 18:28:43 UTC 2006

Peter, very thoughtful comments...

I can recall a few years ago that one of the products I was using (I don't
recall which, but I believe it was a Borland product, back when Borland was
an influential player) included 128 bit DES encryption. The product was
available over the web, and as part of the download process one had to
'certify' that you were located in the U.S. or Canada.

At that time, it was quite illegal to export DES encryption software outside
of North America, but I don't think anyone ever challenged the simple system
of an assertion of location.

I know that the absence of a challenge in itself isn't a legal precedent,
but it does illustrate that this kind of thing has been done before.

Oh, and - Viva Turbo Pascal! (if you are too young to recognize the
reference, that refers to a Borland product circa 1985; their Pascal, C and
Assembler products ran rings around the MS products at a fraction of the
price.)

On 8/5/06, Peter Whittaker <pwwnow at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2006-03-08 at 19:43 -0700, Daniel Robitaille wrote:
> > I'm not convinced of doing a full-fledged Canadian version of Ubuntu
> > is worth the effort... a lot of work to build, to host, to distribute
> > the CDs... [for a] few extra packages....
> >
> > ...create "EasyUbuntuCanada" script or application that runs on standard
> > Ubuntu... and install these different pieces and artwork... asking...
> > which bits the user want.
> >
> > It's a lot smaller and easier to host on ubuntu.ca.
>
> Good idea. While I really like the idea of pushing the boundaries, there
> are issues, as others have pointed out: the current Ubuntu stance on
> packaging potentially encumbered content; having one CD per country or
> set of countries with relevantly similar laws; mastering and hosting
> those CDs; the relatively minor differences between those CDs; etc.
>
> As has also been pointed out, making EasyUbuntuCanada still leaves us
> with a two step process, and the user has to know to go looking for the
> additional package. It is also Canada specific. A general solution would
> be superior, IMHO.
>
> It occurs to me that a much better approach is to integrate installation
> of additional locale-dependent content into the install process itself.
>
> I know that some eyes have just popped from their sockets, but humour
> me, I think this could work....
>
> I also think we should crawl before we walk, and that we should have a
> number of development milestones after each of which work on this
> project could pause, or cease altogether, if the overall consensus was
> that we'd gone far enough.
>
> There are two overall goals (AFAICT, IMHO, etc.)
>
>         1) A single, common Ubuntu installation system and single,
>            common installation CD.
>
>         2) Ability to offer optional content, the availability of
>            which may depend on local regulations (regulations which
>            will change over time), preferably without requiring users
>            to seek out special-purpose packages, while respecting
>            local regulations.
>
> One way to do this would be to create a "call out" package to be invoked
> from the installation process, once the system is in place, networking
> available, and locale determined:
>
>         You have completed installation of Ubuntu, your computer
>         is ready to go. Since you live in <insert country>, there
>         may be additional content available to you. Would you
>         like me to check [y|n]?
>
>         ...
>
>         The following additional packages are available, please
>         select those you wish to install.
>
> This is an "end state" goal (that this system be integrated into the
> actual install system). However, if we do this correctly, we'll have a
> system that can be called as part of installation, or not. (This is the
> milestone-based approach I referred to earlier.)
>
> The benefits of doing this would be that the additional content would be
> available and that users would have to "cheat" to get content prohibited
> by local law. This is a benefit because it might be enough to shield
> Ubuntu while also highlighting the restrictions of local law to the
> users. (Both of which are meta-goals, yes?)
>
> In reverse order, the milestones would be something like:
>
> N.      Integrate the LocaleContent package into Ubuntu installation
>         as a call-out at the of the process (the user is asked whether
>         they wish to invoke it, keeping it optional);
>
> N-1.    Have LocaleContent as part of Main, as the official and
>         optional way of providing additional locale-specific content;
>
> N-2.    Have LocaleContent as part of restricted or universe, as
>         the community's preferred way of providing additional
>         locale-specific content;
>
> N-3.    Populate additional locale-specific servers, with
>         locale-specific or locale-permitted packages (or with
>         pointers or references to those packages), and maintain these
>         over time (adding/removing content as local regulations change,
>         populating servers as locale-specific groups are able to do so)
>         ultimately leaving each LocaleContent-XXX sub package as the
>         responsibility of a locale-specific group.
>
> N-4     Add LocaleContent to universe or multiverse;
>
> N-5     Populate LocaleContent-Canada with references to packages that
>         cannot be part of base Ubuntu but which are permitted in Canada,
>         host LocaleContent-Canada on ca.archive.ubuntu.com or
>         www.ubuntu.ca;
>
> N-6     Host LocaleContent on www.ubuntu.ca (requires specific download
>         not as an apt repository);
>
> N-7     Create LocaleContent, a package that determines the locale,
>         queries a locale-specific source of additional packages, and
>         asks the user which they wish to install.
>
> Or something more or less like that....
>
> Of course, one potential problem with this is that user could "cheat" by
> deliberately mis-specifying their locale during installation, get
> additional packages, then change their locale. Should be LocaleContent
> police this? Probably not. This is but one of the items for discussion.
>
> Another potential problem, one possibly side-stepped by the "no
> policing" idea, would be using this system as a means of removing
> locally-objectionable content (don't see how this could work, though, if
> invoking the thing were optional - if one were to want this, they would
> have to create their own distro to do it, I think.)
>
> Creating an EasyUbuntuCanada has the potential to be a good start on
> such a process, if we used EasyUbuntu as a framework from which to
> build. The differences between EasyUbuntu and EasyUbuntuCanada could be:
> modularization of EasyUbuntu; removal of EasyUbuntu content that is not
> permitted in Canada; identification or inclusion of optional,
> Canada-specific content (wallpapers, etc.).
>
> Thoughts for Saturday morning,
>
> pww
>
> ps      I'm about to get overwhelmed by other commitments, so I will
>         be unable to follow this (or any other threads) for a couple
>         of weeks. Apologies for firing and fleeing, I'm not ignoring
>         anyone, just heading off-line for a bit....
>
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQBE1I1ABhEo3x7NnGkRAnU4AJ4v8kpc/e+2uKqDEZ7fMFz6+eKazQCbBanW
> hTjWLPV/JcyewSOwGOkYysw=
> =NuT/
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
> --
> ubuntu-ca mailing list
> ubuntu-ca at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-ca
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-ca/attachments/20060805/f9ee6cfc/attachment.html>