michael at vorlon.ping.de
Fri Aug 8 08:34:44 BST 2008
On 2008-08-06 17:19:55 -0700, Emil Ong wrote:
> 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.
Is the Pro version redistributable? That's a basic requirement for
packages in multiverse (== non-free in Ubuntu)
Most people prefers to work on free software (and not on close source
one), so it would be a good idea to package the GPL version too.
> 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.
For which architectures is this C-code precompiled?
> 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?
It's the same as for packages to "universe" but don't expect that a
multiverse package gets a high priority (and packages get currently
reviewed very slowly already).
> 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.
That's no problem as long as the license of the pro version allows
redistribution of the binaries.
More information about the Ubuntu-motu