Allow to delete builds/coprs from playground? (was: Re: Meeting minute from Env-and-Stacks WG meeting (2014-04-15))

[Honza Horak]

On 04/15/2014 04:22 PM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
> ============================================
> #fedora-meeting: Env and Stacks (2014-04-15)
>
> Meeting started by mmaslano at 12:01:12 UTC. The full logs are available
> at
> http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2014-04-15/env-and-stacks.20...
>
> .
> Meeting summary
> init process  (mmaslano, 12:01:30)
> LINK:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Workstation_Enable_Software_Collectio...
>  (jreznik, 12:10:17)
>
> Playground repository  (tjanez, 12:32:45)
> LINK: https://github.com/fedora-haskell/common/blob/master/common.mk
> very low-tech :)  (juhp, 13:53:18)
> ACTION: hhorak will add an item to the playground open questions
> about deleting the packages/builds already introduced in playground
> and will send the summary of the irc discussion to the mailing list
> to continue  (hhorak, 14:04:32)

Added to open questions:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Playground_repository_%28draft...

And these are actually the comments from today's meeting worth keeping 
in mind:
* people install packages and later then we are not able to find the 
source for those packages
* disc space for copr builds is very limited
* rawhide deletes old builds as well but we can always find the source 
in dist-git (not possible in copr)
* keeping only srpms could be enough (for me personally it seems like 
the compromise)
* we're not sure if deleting packages in playground would violate GPL 
(legal list CC'd and the question could be -- "Is it violation of GPL if 
we offer RPMs and SRPMs at some point and delete them after some time?" 
-- now it seems like common scenario, happening every day, but rather 
asking to be sure)

Regards,
Honza
> We may follow the Workstation group's "Proposed System Wide Change:
> Workstation: Enable Software Collections" and discuss it on the
> devel list  (hhorak, 14:12:48)
> mirek-hm talked about "dnf playground enable" which would enable all
> copr repos in playground  (hhorak, 14:15:59)
> We talked about scenario that playground would be implemented by
> "copr with playground flag" + "dnf plugin working with such corps".
> No voting done. No final decisions.  (hhorak, 14:19:57)
>
> Meeting ended at 14:21:35 UTC.
> Action Items
> hhorak will add an item to the playground open questions about
>  deleting the packages/builds already introduced in playground and will
>  send the summary of the irc discussion to the mailing list to continue
> Action Items, by person
> hhorak
> hhorak will add an item to the playground open questions about
> deleting the packages/builds already introduced in playground and
> will send the summary of the irc discussion to the mailing list to
> continue
> **UNASSIGNED**
> (none)
> People Present (lines said)
> juhp (122)
> mmaslano (66)
> hhorak (47)
> tjanez (43)
> mirek-hm (26)
> jreznik (13)
> drago01 (6)
> jwb (5)
> zodbot (4)
> Southern_Gentlem (4)
> pkovar (2)
> bkabrda (0)
> samkottler (0)
> abadger1999 (0)
> drieden (0)
>
> Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
>
> .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
>
> env-and-stacks mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/env-and-stacks

[Richard Fontana]

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 05:09:02PM +0200, Honza Horak wrote:
> we're not sure if deleting packages in playground would violate
>
> GPL (legal list CC'd and the question could be -- "Is it violation
> of GPL if we offer RPMs and SRPMs at some point and delete them
> after some time?" -- now it seems like common scenario, happening
> every day, but rather asking to be sure)

If the RPM is available from T0 to T1, and the code in the RPM is
covered by the GPL (or other copyleft license, say), then from T0 to
T1 access to the complete corresponding source code (let's assume the
corresponding SRPM) must also be available "in the same way through
the same place". Once you delete the RPM at T1, having made the SRPM
available also in the same way through the same place from T0 to T1,
then you could delete the SRPM too.

Assuming relatively normal Fedora-style RPMs and SRPMs of course.

- RF

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On 15 April 2014 16:43, Richard Fontana  wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 05:09:02PM +0200, Honza Horak wrote:
> > we're not sure if deleting packages in playground would violate
> >
> > GPL (legal list CC'd and the question could be -- "Is it violation
> > of GPL if we offer RPMs and SRPMs at some point and delete them
> > after some time?" -- now it seems like common scenario, happening
> > every day, but rather asking to be sure)
>
> If the RPM is available from T0 to T1, and the code in the RPM is
> covered by the GPL (or other copyleft license, say), then from T0 to
> T1 access to the complete corresponding source code (let's assume the
> corresponding SRPM) must also be available "in the same way through
> the same place". Once you delete the RPM at T1, having made the SRPM
> available also in the same way through the same place from T0 to T1,
> then you could delete the SRPM too.
>
> Assuming relatively normal Fedora-style RPMs and SRPMs of course.

If ambassadors or another groups makes a cdrom of a playground to give out
a conference.. that would affect things. I am expecting that if it does
rules will need to be laid out about iso images and such.
> RF
>
> legal mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/legal

[Richard Fontana]

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 06:12:54PM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> If ambassadors or another groups makes a cdrom of a playground to give out a
> conference.. that would affect things. I am expecting that if it does rules
> will need to be laid out about iso images and such.

Maybe I should have asked what a "playground" is. What's a playground?

- RF

Allow to delete builds/coprs from playground?

[Honza Horak]

On 04/16/2014 01:01 AM, Richard Fontana wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 06:12:54PM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> > If ambassadors or another groups makes a cdrom of a playground to give out a
> > conference.. that would affect things. I am expecting that if it does rules
> > will need to be laid out about iso images and such.
>
> Maybe I should have asked what a "playground" is. What's a playground?

Generally it should be a new additional repository for Fedora, that has 
some more relaxed packaging guidelines (no change to Legal guidelines, 
these should be met as by other packages). Packages for this new repo 
will be built in Copr.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Playground_repository_(draft)

Regards,
Honza

Allow to delete builds/coprs from playground?

[Honza Horak]

On 04/15/2014 10:43 PM, Richard Fontana wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 05:09:02PM +0200, Honza Horak wrote:
> > we're not sure if deleting packages in playground would violate
> >
> > GPL (legal list CC'd and the question could be -- "Is it violation
> > of GPL if we offer RPMs and SRPMs at some point and delete them
> > after some time?" -- now it seems like common scenario, happening
> > every day, but rather asking to be sure)
>
> If the RPM is available from T0 to T1, and the code in the RPM is
> covered by the GPL (or other copyleft license, say), then from T0 to
> T1 access to the complete corresponding source code (let's assume the
> corresponding SRPM) must also be available "in the same way through
> the same place". Once you delete the RPM at T1, having made the SRPM
> available also in the same way through the same place from T0 to T1,
> then you could delete the SRPM too.
>
> Assuming relatively normal Fedora-style RPMs and SRPMs of course.

Thank you for the respond, Richard.

I think we're fine in this regard then. I've updated the wiki.

Regards,
Honza