Daphile: termini di licenza

[marcoc1712]

Per evitare di continuare a scrivere di Daphile sul thd dedicato all'upsampling con LMS e squeezelite ma nello stesso tempo per dare corretta evidenza ai chiarimenti che Kimmo (il mantainer di Daphile) sta via via fornendo alle mie richieste in merito, apro questo THD, nel quale riporterò via via le mie richieste e informazioni che mi perverranno in risposta.

MI asterrò invece da qualsiasi commento o valutazione diversa.

[marcoc1712]

Prima domanda, inviata usando il modulo 'contacts' del sito di Daphile:

Hi,

Where I could find licence terms of this package?

Thanks,

Marco.

[marcoc1712]

Prima risposta (automatica) da Daphile:

Automatic reply from Daphile

Hi,

Thanks for your message and contacting Daphile. I really appreciate all feedback but
unfortunately for the time being I won't have enough time to respond, support or further
develop Daphile. So I won't most probably be replying the messages – sorry for that.
However I'll try to release maintenance updates every now and then.

Below you can find a short list of frequently asked questions with answers. In case you don't
find any help from there, you could try the following forums where you might find other
Daphile users.

Logitech Squeezebox: Squeezebox : Community : Forums
diyAudio: PC Based - diyAudio
Computer Audiophile: Music Servers
forum Audiophile (French): Musique dématérialisée
etc...

Kind regards
Kimmo

[marcoc1712]

Seconda risposta da Daphile:

Hi,

The license terms of the included packages are available via Daphile web interface at Info-tab -> Credits.

The source code and patches of the packages where license requires the source redistribution can be found from here:
Index of /gpl-src

There is also a DISCLAIMER to be notified. It's available on Daphile web page:
http://www.daphile.com/firmware/testing/DISCLAIMER

Commercial usage and redistribution is prohibited because Daphile uses some third party internet services that are free of charge only for the non-commercial projects.

If you have any other specific reason to ask this, please ask again more detailed.

Cheers
Kimmo

Di fatto questo risponde formalmente alla maggior parte degli obblighi dettati dalle licenze GPL di molti dei componenti.

[marcoc1712]

Rimanendomi ancora non chiari i termini di licenza d'uso e distribuzione di Daphile per se, ho inviato questa ulteriore domanda, che segnala anche una probabile incongruenza tra quanto riportato nella lista dei sorgenti e quanto effettivamente in uso, almeno in merito a squeezelite:

Hi

Thanks for details, but I'm not sure to well understand if:

a. I'm I allowed to modify some of the GPL licensed components distributed with Daphile.
b. I'm I allowed to distribute the so modified distribution of Daphile.

Sure not for commercial intends.

If Yes (as it should be), How could I Access the 'official' releases since only the private beta has ssh access?

Last but not least, just looked at Squeezelite 1.8 at the moment and seems to me in the source list you provided the standard one, that could not be the one running in Daphile, at least if compiled using the provided make file (this is the really first reason I'm asking for source code).

Thanks in advance for you kind answers.

Marco

P.s.

Same questions in DIYAudio forum, after your automatic reply.

[marcoc1712]

Risposta di Kimmo:

Marco,

See my answers/comments below.

Cheers
Kimmo

On 28.09.2015 14:07, Marco Curti wrote:
> Hi
>
> Thanks for details, but I'm not sure to well understand if:
>
> a. I'm I allowed to modify some of the GPL licensed components distributed with Daphile.
Of course you are.
> b. I'm I allowed to distribute the so modified distribution of Daphile.
No, you are allowed to do that if I understood you right. There are components (eg. most of the files but not all under /opt/spac, /opt/fwtool, /opt/netmgr, /opt/daphile, /var/www and /usr/local/bin) included in Daphile that are completely written by me. They are not open source and they may not be redistributed with anything else but Daphile, not for example as part of a modified Daphile version. I have the copyrights of them. I will clarify the license for these in the near future. Sorry but that's my choice.
>
> Sure not for commercial intends.
>
> If Yes (as it should be), How could I Access the 'official' releases since only the private beta has ssh access?
"Official" version does not have the ssh server enabled because I don't want that there is such a hole for the users who don't know how or care to change the default password. And I have not been motivated enough to develop the password configuration (and related recovery mechanisms for forgotten password, etc... that would be a necessity and it's not so trivial) to the web interface. The private betas are basically the same, with only exception that private betas include couple of extra applications for debugging purposes and possibly some updates.

And if you really want to access files of the official version you can copy the SquashFS root filesystem file (on DaphileBoot partition /boot/fwXXXXXXXXXX/rootfs) to another Linux and mount it there (eg. mount -t squashfs rootfs /mnt/daphile_rootfs).
>
> Last but not least, just looked at Squeezelite 1.8 at the moment and seems to me in the source list you provided the standard one, that could not be the one running in Daphile, at least if compiled using the provided make file (this is the really first reason I'm asking for source code).
I'm not sure what do you mean here. The latest official version has the Squeezelite 1.8 with these two patches:
1. faad-optional-1.6.4.patch (the version numbering is a bit misleading here but actually this patch is completely obsolete because )
2. gentoo-makefile.patch
Add it's build with these options (see squeezelite --help on Daphile): LINUX ALSA EVENTFD RESAMPLE FFMPEG VISEXPORT DSD

The latest private beta has additionally the attached patch (I have sent it to Squeezelite developer Adrian "Triode" Smith but he seems to be not maintaining the project anymore). I'll add this patch to source tree along with the next official release if it's not included in official squeezelite repository by Triode.
>
> Thanks in advance for you kind answers.
>
> P.s.
>
> Same questions in DIYAudio forum, after your automatic reply.
Sorry but I don't have enough time to participate on forums anymore :-(.

Il punto cruciale è la risposta al punto B.

[marcoc1712]

Mia ulteriore richiesta di chiarimento:

I see.

Not arguing your choices, but not sure you are completely in your rigths here.

By the way, I'm then allowed to produce a modified version of squeezelite, compile it (don't know how, maybe in a standard gentoo installation) and distribute it with instruction to replace the standrad one in Daphile?

If so, Is not that just like distributing a modified version of Daphile?

Please let me Know , I'm retaining myself to do this awayting for your opinion and agreement.

As a side note, but I'm not the one who could argue on that, I would like you think about this:

People using the 'standard' version are prevent to apply mods on eg. squeezelite, and this - in my opinion - broke the GPLv3 licence agreement of squeezelite. Obviously you think is not like that, could you explain me why?

Thanks in advance.

[marcoc1712]

Risposta:

I am not preventing anyone from using a modified version of any open source application (eg. modified squeezelite) in Daphile. Anyone is free to do so. However I don't have any responsibility to support people on doing that (except provide the source code and possible Daphile specific changes for such components where license terms require me to do so). For example I don't have to provide the compiler tools in Daphile. You just need to have the tools somewhere else and then replace the binary by your own.

I fully respect all the open source licenses, will follow them all and I'm aware of my responsibilities there.

You can do modified version of Daphile as you like but you may not redistribute any binaries and/or scripts that are under my copyright. I hope you will also respect my rights.

You are also free to provide modified squeezelite binary and instructions on how to replace the existing one with it. I don't have and I even couldn't have anything against that. Of course I would prefer if you could propose improvement patches to me and I could include them in the standard Daphile.

[marcoc1712]

Finisce così.

Thanks for clarifications and sure I'm going to respect your rights, this is why I'm asking instead of just assuming.

Maybe You missed it, but I'have already proposed to you (and to Triode) my modification that you could find here :

https://github.com/marcoc1712/squeezelite and is aimed to make possible the playback of server side upsampled Wav /Aif files.

You are welcome to copy this very symple mod (It's not a patch, just becouse I had to copy the repo from google code, but just look at pcm.c) and use it in Daphile, You don't even need to name me as a source, the code was already here, yust changed an if condition...

To be clear, I do think you are preventing people using the 'standard' version, to modify any components in Daphile just becouse there is no way to SSH in and replace/modify files. Seems to me like a kind of "Tivoization", but It's your decision and your responsability I'm not in position to argue about that and I'm really not interested in doing it, just wishing to understand your mind about this point.

Sure you are completely rigth about you don't have to support people on doing that or even provvide the compiler, as far as it's a functionality of the included OS that anyone could activate by himself, having sources and assuming he knows how.

[marcoc1712]

Per riassumere e concludere:

1. Daphile è un prodotto chiuso, le versioni ufficiali, anche se contengono codice licenziato GPL non sono modificabili, a quello scopo si deve utilizzare una private demo. Lo scopo è quello di evitarsi problemi di supporto (cosa indubbiamente vera), Il mantainer ritiene e sostiene di essere nei suoi diritti mentre io ritengo non sia così, ma tant'è.

2. Con le restrizioni di cui sopra, si è liberi di modificare qualsiasi componente 'open source' distribuita con daphile, il cui codice sorgente è disponibile a richiesta.

3. Non si è autorizzati a ridistribuire Daphile nella forma 'modificata' sostituendo o modificando uno o più componenti open source, mentre si è autorizzati a fornire le componenti modificate in se e le istruzioni su come sostituirle e/o applicare le modifiche in Daphile. I termini di licenza che regolano questo aspetto NON sono ancora dichiarati espressamente, il mantainer dice che lo farà presto, ma vertono sul fatto che alcune componenti sono proprietarie per sua scelta e non intende autorizzarne la libera distribuzione al di fuori della sua versione di Daphile.

E' un terreno minato, a mio avviso è una restrizione impropria, ma certamente non sarò io a non rispettarla.

4. Ovviamente come risultato di 2 e 3 si perde diritto all'assistenza ed al supporto da parte di Daphile (che comunque è espressamente declinato come vincolo all'origine). Mi sembra sacrosanto.

Almeno adesso è più chiaro.