Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Open source in multiverse

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Beans
    12

    Open source in multiverse

    Howdy!

    My understanding is that some of the software in the multiverse repository is open source even if its licensing is not free. For example, maelstrom, if I remember correctly, is open source, but there are issues with the license on the graphics. Regardless, I don't want to introduce closed-source software to my systems, but I don't have Stallman Syndrome either. Does anyone know of a good way to enable multiverse but restrict it to packages with source? Also, any ideas why they would lump all this software into one repo instead of separating out open-source/non-free from plain vanilla non-free?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Tennessee
    Beans
    3,411

    Re: Open source in multiverse

    I guess in theory you could just enable a source repository, and install things from it using "apt-src" or "apt-get source". Otherwise, you're going to have to do the legwork yourself, if the distinction is that important to you.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    London, England
    Beans
    6,389
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Open source in multiverse

    This wiki page page explains that in Ubuntu the repositories are

    Main: Officially supported software

    Restricted: Supported software that is not available under a completely free license.

    Universe: Community maintained software, i.e., not officially supported software.

    Multiverse: Software that is not free.

    https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Repositories/Ubuntu

    "Free" is used in this context

    http://www.ubuntu.com/about/about-ubuntu/our-philosophy

    If I understand the definition of Free and Open Source Software then software is not 'free' if the source code is not 'open.' The Software and Updates utility describes multiverse as "software restricted by copyright or legal issues." And we find that this is different from proprietary video drivers which are in the Restricted repository, even though the source code of the drivers is not open.

    Regards.

    P.S. What is the issue with Maelstrom? It is now released under the Creative commons license. And here is the source code.

    http://www.libsdl.org/projects/Maelstrom/source.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maelstr...92_video_game)

    It does require something called Simple DirectMedia Layer which has the zlib license. which says

    Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose,
    including commercial applications, and to alter it and redistribute it
    freely, subject to the following restrictions:

    1. The origin of this software must not be misrepresented; you must not
    claim that you wrote the original software. If you use this software
    in a product, an acknowledgment in the product documentation would be
    appreciated but is not required.
    2. Altered source versions must be plainly marked as such, and must not be
    misrepresented as being the original software.
    3. This notice may not be removed or altered from any source distribution.
    http://www.gzip.org/zlib/zlib_license.html
    Last edited by grahammechanical; November 24th, 2013 at 03:32 PM.
    It is a machine. It is more stupid than we are. It will not stop us from doing stupid things.
    Ubuntu user #33,200. Linux user #530,530


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Beans
    12

    Re: Open source in multiverse

    Thanks for the replies guys. I'm not entirely sure what the problem is with maelstrom, I just remember it was in the multiverse repo despite being open source.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •