AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
Freefilesync in repo11/9/2023 ![]() ![]() The reason is (unsurprisingly) that third-party installers skip the "Support the Project" message during installation. I'm sorry, but I'm not going to allow it. If you, Zenju, don't agree with this, I'll either need to switch to compiling from source again, or remove FFS from Flathub, if I understand it correctly.Īnd the developer's ("Zenju") response is here: I'm writing this post to request a permission from the FFS author (Zenju), so that Flathub can continue to distribute FFS pre-compiled binaries. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems that converting the provided binaries (previously included in a tarball, now in a runnable installer) into a flatpak package is currently forbidden. For example, the integration into a third-party automated installation mechanism is forbidden without the prior permission of the author. ![]() The inclusion of the installer package or any of the included files in a different archive, or in a different installer is forbidden. Redistributing the installer package with any files added, removed, or modified is prohibited. The software must be distributed free of charge and without modification to the contents of the installer package. I have been notified by a community member that the current license seems to disallow that. In the past, I compiled FFS from source, but due to various problems (like FFS depending on custom-patched system libraries, and others) I switched to distributing FFS Linux binaries, as provided on the download page: I'm the maintainer of the FFS flatpak package distributed by Flathub: Just in case the upstream forum ever gets inaccessible, I'm going to quote here in full. The upstream author did deny my request (created before I was aware of extra-data functionality). Is Flathub subject to upstream demands in this case, or it isn't? Or do you mean that Flathub would comply as a gesture of good will? Obviously if upstream ever asks us to stop, then we likely would comply, but this is go-to solution for proprietary software. Can I consider your response as an official blessing to continue releasing FFS on Flathub using extra-data? Is there some Flathub's staff who can legally guide us I see you're a member of the Flathub project. wine uses to download Microsoft's fonts or libraries - directly from the user's computer, and then process them. OTOH, Flathub would not distribute the FFS binary and therefore its license should not apply at all, or should it? Can the developer legally oblige us to do or not do something, when we don't redistribute his/her software at all, just provide scripts to operate on it? It seems the same approach as e.g. It is true that Flathub would provide scripts to automate a FFS installation. The inclusion of the installer package or any of the included files in a different archive, or in a different installer is forbidden.įor example, the integration into a third-party automated installation mechanism is forbidden without the prior permission of the author. ![]() If that's the case, this would definitely not apply: It a bit under-documented (see Extra data sources). Here's the Spotify manifest (notice this and this).ĭo I understand correctly that extra-data is downloaded during installation from the users' computer, and therefore Flathub doesn't redistribute the referenced file? (A bit off-topic: That means that such Flatpak installations can easily fail, right?). Simply switch the FFS module in the manifest to use extra-data like Spotify does. ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |