From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun Jul 8 3: 8: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from peter3.wemm.org (c1315225-a.plstn1.sfba.home.com [65.0.135.147]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BBA937B405; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 03:07:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from overcee.netplex.com.au (overcee.wemm.org [10.0.0.3]) by peter3.wemm.org (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f68A7SM77466; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 03:07:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) Received: from wemm.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.netplex.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C93F3811; Sun, 8 Jul 2001 03:07:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from peter@wemm.org) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Sergey Babkin Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp , Kris Kennaway , "Louis A. Mamakos" , Jordan Hubbard , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, wes@softweyr.com, tedm@toybox.placo.com, ewayte@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD Mall now BSDCentral In-Reply-To: <3B47E06D.32067E46@bellatlantic.net> Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 03:07:28 -0700 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <20010708100728.5C93F3811@overcee.netplex.com.au> Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Sergey Babkin wrote: > Peter Wemm wrote: > > > > Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > > In message <3B4650D0.97F10B83@bellatlantic.net>, Sergey Babkin writes: > > > > > > >If the FreeBSD Foundation is an existing entity now, maybe we > > > >can just change the license for the CD images to "not for resale" > > > >unless the distributor signs an agreement with the Foundation ? > > First, I want to say that after Jordan's explanation I agree > that this is not a worty idea, at least for now. So the > further is just for a more clear explanation. > > > > Why on _earth_ would we make it so hard for people to get hold > > > of a media copy of FreeBSD, when absolutely nothing prevents > > For example, to help fund the release engineering process. What release engineering process? The way things stand right now: - snapshots get regularly built by US-WEST machines. - somebody does a periodic 'make release' and calls it a beta - volunteers test it - somebody does a 'make release' and calls it a release - the packages are collected from the package building machines that run continuously and put in directories - somebody does a mkisofs for the 4 cd set. There isn't much else that gets added to make something 'official' or not. The FreeBSD project provides the base images. The official release is the base system that goes on ftp.freebsd.org. There isn't much here that can be paid for. Yahoo provided the i386 ports build machines. Compaq provided the Alpha ports build machines. US-WEST provided the snapshot build machines. Yahoo and US-WEST provide bandwidth. The ports build system is supervised by volunteers who do it for fun and/ or personal satisfaction for the project at large. The ftp and cvsup mirrors and bandwidth for those are provided by a cast of thousands. > > > me or anybody else from rolling a net distribution ? > > If buying the rights to the "official" distribution is cheaper, > why would anyone want to redo it ? Anybody can make their own release that is indistinguishable from the official release. There is no 'value add' on the official release at all, apart from somebody ftp'ing the XFree86 releases, the freebsd releases and the ports packages / distfiles and shuffling it to make it all fit. Anybody can do that. In fact, we've now got a DVD release in the pipeline that doesn't even need all that much in the way of shuffling. The only thing that the freebsd.org 'make release' command doesn't do is actually run mkisofs so that it spits out a bootable .iso image. The reason the project provides all this for free is because many of the developers who did it are using it themselves for internal releases within their companies etc. I dont mean to undersell the effort that jkh and crew go to in order that we actually get a release coordinated, and there is a fair bit more to having a worthwhile release than producing a .iso image. There is cover artwork, the logistics of getting CD's made, inventory, shipping, getting CD's into stores, etc. I'd wager *that* is far more costly and time consuming than rolling a few custom .iso's. > > And if some organization is funding developers to work on FreeBSD full > > time, then I personally would go out of my way to help them too, should > > they need something. (several spring to mind) > > > > All this hot air about "protecting" the .iso's is the *least* of our > > It's not about protecting. It's about financiallly stimulating more > organizations to fund developers to work on FreeBSD. The ISO image > distribution rights don't have to be exchanged for money, they > may just as well (and better) be exchanged for such support. Encouraging more organizations to fund developers is an entirely different thing to charging for release materials that can be independently generated for free in a few hours/days/whatever. Cheers, -Peter -- Peter Wemm - peter@FreeBSD.org; peter@yahoo-inc.com; peter@netplex.com.au "All of this is for nothing if we don't go to the stars" - JMS/B5 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message