I sent an email to the Fedora Legal list asking whether they will accept software released under the MS-PL license. My friend and former colleague, Brett Lentz mentioned that he was concerned that the Fedora folks might not accept software released under the MS-PL. So I asked. I also bcc’d a certain troll on said mail so as to get lots of flame mail. I’m practicing to become a master twitterbaiter.
14:43 < cj> wakko666: so… we are building ironruby/ironpython debian packages over on OFTC/#debian-cli
14:43 < wakko666> k
14:43 < cj> meebey just packaged up mono 2.4.2.3 in .deb
14:44 < cj> with some backported patches required to get the DLR language engines running correctly
14:44 < wakko666> k
14:44 < cj> we’re using xbuild to perform the build, thanks to ankit’s recent patches.
14:44 < cj> alarm went off. need to address food.
14:44 < wakko666> i know that mono is already in Fedora.
14:45 < cj> great. any idea what version?
14:45 < wakko666> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=30
14:45 < cj> we’ll need 2.4.2.3 + some patches. This is pretty bleeding edge, but I expect the fedora packagers are as ‘on it’ as the debian folks
14:46 < wakko666> fedora tends to be a bit further ahead of the curve than the debian folks
14:46 < cj> we can supply them the patches required. they are also being merged into the 2.4 branch, so should be in the next official release
14:46 < wakko666> k.. shouldn’t be a problem.
14:47 < cj> here is the tarball we’re using to build the .deb
14:47 < cj> http://github.com/mletterle/ironruby/tarball/20090805+git.e6b28d27
14:49 < cj> most of the stuff you’ll need as far as build commands go are in debian/rules:
http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-cli-libs/packages/dlr-languages.git;a=tree;f=debian;h=8e4c0abc01ba2db27fe66d508317cef3b574fd3a;hb=f3c10b84cf5f12cb670d14232263ac81662ff714
14:49 < cj> I’ve got to finish making lunch for kids ;)
14:49 < cj> back shortly.
14:55 < wakko666> cj: my main concern about packaging ironruby is licensing. Fedora will accept packages under the MS-Shared-Source license [ed: this is not at all true.], but the MS-PL isn’t on their list of acceptable license. [ed: it is now.]
14:58 < cj> wakko666: alrighty. jschementi is the guy to talk with about licensing issues. He’ll be back some time soon, I’m sure
14:58 < wakko666> of course, i can always write the spec file and you guys can host your own rpms, but it would be nice to actually get it into Fedora proper.
14:59 < cj> also, MS-PL is dfsg compliant and OSL-approved. Is it a decision to deny MS-PL or that it just hasn’t been reviewed yet?
14:59 < wakko666> not sure. we’d need to ask on the fedora-legal-list mailing list
14:59 < wakko666> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#SoftwareLicenses
15:00 < cj> alright. at another time. it’s nap time for scarlet and zelda. ;)
15:01 < wakko666> sure thing. if you ping the fedora-legal list, let me know what they have to say.
19:49 < cj> wakko666: firestorm initiated.
7 responses to “Looking to get Iron* and the DLR into RedHat”
the MS-PL is OSI approved, I also believe we have other software under that license in the Fedora repos. I doubt there is a problem – outside Fedoras normal issues with Mono.
You are welcome to contact the Mono SIG if you have special requests for the Fedora Mono stack though. We would love to work closer with both other downstreams and upstream to make Mono even better.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-mono
Cool. I think we can do something about that. How well do you know Andrew Jorgensen?
Make sure everyone’s on the upstream mono-packagers list
And consider joining #debian-cli on OFTC where all the cool kids hang out
As you start this holy war, I would like to point out that Fedora and Red Hat are not quite the same. Packages that make it into Fedora do not necessarily make it into RHEL. There are currently no packages for RHEL5 and the last time there were MONO packages for RHEL5 (and dependencies) was at version 1.9.1. There is animosity both from Red Hat and Novell so you will have a hard time no matter which side you choose to talk to. I wish you luck. If you build packages and dependencies for RHEL5 and choose to host your own repo, people will find it. It is a shame that Novell and Red Hat can’t get along because they probably could help each other out.
Thanks for the clarification, Vlad. I recall a presentation Michael gave at Amazon a few years ago on the subject. He claimed that Fedora was the testing ground and “early adopter” section of RedHat. I s’pose I should have been explicit, though…
Yeah, if nobody else packages it, I’m happy to host some. Yay for exposure.
MS-SSCLI is *NOT* a Free license, as spot points out on fedora-legal
Jo,
I find it difficult to believe that a shill like yourself would claim that anything produced by Microsoft is non-free. Apoplectic even.
Kisses,
C.J.