[task #16596] Submission of simphone

[simphone]

Follow-up Comment #8, task #16596 (group administration):

Upgraded openssl to version 3.0, which uses the apache license. Here's the
updated tarball:

http://www.simphone.org/0.9.3/simphone-src-0.9.3-a2.tar.gz

Other changes also made with this update:
* removed build/rlink/, build/makedepend/ and efence/
* updated public domain notices in all files as you advised
* added public domain notice to qsimphone/resources/countries.txt
* explicitly listed all files in qsimphone/resources/README.txt and
qsimphone/icons/README.txt
* added CC0 public domain dedication as
qsimphone/resources/cc0-public-domain.txt
* added public domain notices to all diff files in patches/
* updated last copyright year to 2024 everywhere
* renamed doc/DISCLAIMER.PD to doc/DISCLAIMER.txt
* removed doc/COPYING.txt (GPL2 text)

LGPL 2.1 text is included as doc/COPYING.LESSER.txt, but as I understand GPL2
is not desired, so removed (please correct me if this was wrong).

> "...dedicated to the public domain under the CC0 Public Domain Dedication."
> 
> I stand corrected.  Then it's a copy of CC0 that is missing from your
> tarball.

Now included (as described above).

> But the binary reproduction and possibly even building is broken when mingw
> version changes.  I'm not sure if you care about the reproducibility
> specifically on that platform.  From Savannah policies perspective, that
> might qualify as a feature unsupported on free systems.  I don't think it
> works, but if a goal is set, it may be achieved some day.

We care for reprodicibility on all platforms Simphone can run on. Procedures
for all three platforms are exactly defined in the "Binary Reproduction"
chapter in doc/compiling html. To reproduce our binaries, you (or the user)
have to use the same exact versions of all tools and libraries involved with
the build process. On windows, this means that Qt 5.3.2 and the mingw version
included with it must be used. On Mac OS X, Xcode 3.2.6 is to be installed. On
GNU/Linux, one has to start by installing an ISO image of Debian GNU/Linux
6.0.10; in that case, the whole OS is defined as "tools and libraries" for the
purpose of binary reproduction. This has worked very well so far in that the
compiled binary seems to run fine on many if not most current GNU/Linux
distributions.

Of course, any user is also free to use newer versions of tools and libraries
on any platform and indeed the compiled binaries will then change. But in any
case, our build scripts ensure that once a binary is compiled, a rerun of the
scripts produces the same binary as before, as long as the versions of the
used dependencies and the name of the source directory have not been changed
since the original run. This means you can take any version of any free OS,
produce a binary with it, and then anyone can reproduce it, as long as they
use the same OS version. That's unless some sort of a "rolling release" binary
distribution is in use, which from our point of view carries a major security
risk not only for Simphone, but for all installed software.


> As far as I understand, RPSL section 4.2 allows to link to the works under a
> set of licenses, but it says nothing about whether those licenses allow
> linking with code under RPSL.  On www.gnu.org, it is listed as
> GPL-incompatible,

Sorry to bring this up again; after rereading I'm not really sure what you
mean by "linking". So I want to point out that Simphone binaries never did
contain any RPSL-licensed code. The latter was only called by the build
scripts (at compile time) in order to bring the binary size down, by removing
unused machine code. Does that change anything? If so, we would be glad if we
could re-add rlink; else we keep it removed as already agreed and done.



    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.nongnu.org/task/?16596>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.nongnu.org/

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature