On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 10:56:45 +0100
KatolaZ <katolaz@???> wrote:

> DR D1Rs,
>
> yesterday I was reviewing a new package made by Daniel Abrecht (DPA),
> a little library that implements the sd_journal_* functions by
> redirecting the calls to syslog. The project can be found here:
>
> https://git.devuan.org/DPA/sd_journal_shim
>
> This would allow to avoid to link against libsystemd0 if the program
> wants just to use systemd logging facilities.
>
> I was about to move it under devuan-packages to build it for
> experimental, but I noticed that the License (an almost regular
> Expat/MIT license, for the rest) contained an additional clause:
>
> "This software shall not be used to encourage others to use the
> systemd journal API, or any of it's sd_journal_* functions."
>
> so I immediately held my horses. My main complaint here is that this
> clause makes the software non compliant with freedom 0 (the freedom to
> use the software for whatever aim and task), so technically speaking
> the package is not free-software, and cannot go in Devuan/main. Aside
> from that, that clause makes the library GPL-incompatible, which would
> undermine the good intentions of DPA. making the library practically
> useless (unless the programs linking it are not GPL).
>
> In a word, I would not agree to include this package in Devuan/main,
> unless that clause is removed. But just for the sake of clarity (and
> because I think this can create a nasty precedent) I thought it was
> good to ask here.
>
> Please, please, please: let's avoid to tranform this in a flame. The
> thing is that Devuan/main should include only free-software, and that
> clause makes the package non-compliant with the basic freedom 0. We
> would like suggestions as of whether the clause should be removed or
> the package should go in Devuan/non-free (I can't see any other5B
> alternative).

I see exactly why he wrote that clause into his license, I see his
point, I might have done it myself, but I agree he just made it nonfree.

I agree with you that it doesn't belong in Devuan with the license the
way it is. I wonder what would happen if you wrote the author and told
him how that clause kept his software from solving a real Devuan
problem. Maybe, just maybe, he'd remove the clause.

SteveT

Steve Litt
July 2017 featured book: Quit Joblessness: Start Your Own Business
http://www.troubleshooters.com/startbiz