superm1 at ubuntu.com
Thu Aug 7 19:09:18 BST 2008
On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 05:52, Sikon <inetperson at gmail.com> wrote:
> Packages that include binaries are not allowed, even in the multiverse
> repository (which includes things like flashplugin-nonfree that you
I don't recall coming across this ever in policy. Could you point it out?
It's a matter of redistribution rights. If the license explicitly allows
redistribution of the binaries, it's okay I thought. The reason that
flashplugin-nonfree is the way it is is because Adobe doesn't allow
redistribution except via their website.
> Instead of distributing the actual binaries in the deb file, such
> packages download the binaries from the upstream website. This is a
> standard practice. What you can do is set up, say, a tar.gz file on
> your web server for the installer script to find, download and
> However, I don't know about the others, but I'd prefer the GPL version
> to be packaged first. Ubuntu is, after all, first and foremost about
> free software. We use Resin in our company, and I use Ubuntu at my
> workstation, so I'm interested in helping to package Resin for Ubuntu.
> 2008/8/7 Emil Ong <emil at caucho.com>:
> > Hi MOTU,
> > I'm an engineer at Caucho, which makes the Resin Java application
> > server. We've recently created a .deb package of our server that
> > we'd like to distribute on the Ubuntu repositories. There's an
> > existing needs-packaging bug for Resin on Lauchpad, #105497.
> > There are a couple of hitches, though. We dual-license Resin as GPL
> > and a closed source professional (upsell) version with a bit of extra
> > code for added performance/clustering. We'd like to distribute the
> > latter in the non-free repository (similar to flashplugin-nonfree).
> > At the moment, we don't have a package of the GPL version and I'm
> > not sure whether/when we'll be doing that.
> > Part of the rational is that the professional version just reverts
> > to the open source functionality if it doesn't find a license.
> > Another reason for the Pro package is that it contains some
> > platform-dependent code in C, while the pure GPL version contains
> > only Java; we wanted to remove the need for users to compile that
> > additional code.
> > What is the procedure for submitting something to the nonfree
> > repository? The REVU page (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/REVU)
> > that I saw doesn't seem to address this case, but I'm guessing
> > there's some process because of Flash, et al. Can someone point me
> > in the right direction?
> > If I understand correctly, the flashplugin-nonfree package actually
> > downloads the plugin from Adobe. I should note that our package
> > will include the actual binaries.
> > Thanks,
> > Emil
> > ============================================================
> > Emil Ong
> > Software Engineer
> > Caucho Technology, Inc.
> > mailto:emil at caucho.com
> > http://blog.caucho.com/
> > Caucho: Reliable Open Source
> > --> Resin: application server
> > --> Quercus: PHP in Java
> > --> Hessian Web Services
> > --
> > Ubuntu-motu mailing list
> > Ubuntu-motu at lists.ubuntu.com
> > Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> Ubuntu-motu mailing list
> Ubuntu-motu at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
superm1 at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Ubuntu-motu