License question

Hello all,

I noticed that the license text in the makeall file is different from
the license text on the website. The one in the makeall file still has
the old license I think ?

Secondly the makeall file has a "phone home" function wich i think is
normally only something for spyware/adware like programs and not for
opensource projects. If the developers are interested in hearing who is
using what version of radiance they could simply ask if people would
want to mail them that information.

- Erwin

···

--
       Erwin Rol Software Engineering - http://www.erwinrol.com/

Erwin Rol wrote:

Hello all,

Hello neighbour! (well, almost :wink:

I noticed that the license text in the makeall file is different from
the license text on the website. The one in the makeall file still has
the old license I think ?

Looks like it, yes. I'm not into that topic in detail, but it
seems to make sense to have the same language in both places,
so we should probably update the build scripts.

Secondly the makeall file has a "phone home" function wich i think is
normally only something for spyware/adware like programs and not for
opensource projects. If the developers are interested in hearing who is
using what version of radiance they could simply ask if people would
want to mail them that information.

While I share your concerns about spyware in general, I think the
comparison is a little far fetched here. We're not monitoring
your surfing habits or anything...

I have a hard time seeing what kind of data protection problems
the transmission of the following information could cause
(together with your e-mail address):

  char VersionID[]="RADIANCE 3.6a lastmod Mon Nov 17 21:30:59 CET
    2003 by gm on local";

On the other hand, I have no idea how useful the data collected
like this over the years at LBNL really is. I think it *was*
useful at one time, in order to justify funding. Since funding
out of their regular budget has stopped long ago, and a growing
number of users either download Radiance in binary form or use
one of the available Windows versions, it's probably not as
helpful anymore today. I certainly wouldn't miss this "feature"
if it went away.

-schorsch

···

--
Georg Mischler -- simulations developer -- schorsch at schorsch com
+schorsch.com+ -- lighting design tools -- http://www.schorsch.com/

Erwin Rol wrote:

> Hello all,

Hello neighbour! (well, almost :wink:

> I noticed that the license text in the makeall file is different from
> the license text on the website. The one in the makeall file still has
> the old license I think ?

Looks like it, yes. I'm not into that topic in detail, but it
seems to make sense to have the same language in both places,
so we should probably update the build scripts.

> Secondly the makeall file has a "phone home" function wich i think is
> normally only something for spyware/adware like programs and not for
> opensource projects. If the developers are interested in hearing who is
> using what version of radiance they could simply ask if people would
> want to mail them that information.

While I share your concerns about spyware in general, I think the
comparison is a little far fetched here. We're not monitoring
your surfing habits or anything...

I have a hard time seeing what kind of data protection problems
the transmission of the following information could cause
(together with your e-mail address):

  char VersionID[]="RADIANCE 3.6a lastmod Mon Nov 17 21:30:59 CET
    2003 by gm on local";

On the other hand, I have no idea how useful the data collected
like this over the years at LBNL really is. I think it *was*
useful at one time, in order to justify funding. Since funding
out of their regular budget has stopped long ago, and a growing
number of users either download Radiance in binary form or use
one of the available Windows versions, it's probably not as
helpful anymore today. I certainly wouldn't miss this "feature"
if it went away.

If there is really interest in this info a better way would be a form on
the download page where you can (on voluntarily basis) give your email
address when downloading the tar ball.

Don't get me wrong, I also like to hear from people that use the few
opensource programs i wrote, I just think thats up to those people and
not up to me.

-schorsch

- Erwin

···

On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 14:14, Georg Mischler wrote:

--
       Erwin Rol Software Engineering - http://www.erwinrol.com/

The "phone home" feature of the makeall script and the data it generates has not been looked at, as far as I know, since I left LBL in May 2000. In the old days, Greg would use it to "keep a pulse" on the progress of his updates...how many people have compiled the software versus just downloading it. This was intended to provide some feedback to DOE for funding purposes, but I'm not sure that ever happened. We also used it to fix the old Radiance "announcement" list when a would-be subscriber's email address was mangled or unintelligible. The "data" exists only as a series of email messages residing in a user account on LBL's Radiance server (radsite.lbl.gov).

When I started working at LBL, I too thought the phone-home feature was a bit 1984-ish. I support the idea of getting rid of it in favor of a web form with required (unchecked) personal registration information (that is saved) before downloading the tarballs. This is in line with access to the Desktop Radiance installation package. Immediately prior to the registration form, the OpenSource license is displayed and the would-be user must "accept" its terms in order to proceed to the download.

This information can then be used at some future date to support efforts to develop an ongoing funding source for Radiance--or at least paying for the server space. I know how much everyone hates web page ads, but Peter Apian-Bennewitz's benevolence may not last for ever, even if he remains at his current place of employment.

-Chas

This information can then be used at some future date to support
efforts to develop an ongoing funding source for Radiance--or at least
paying for the server space. I know how much everyone hates web page
ads, but Peter Apian-Bennewitz's benevolence may not last for ever,
even if he remains at his current place of employment.

Of course the Radiance license allows people to redistribute the tar
balls from other websites. So in general is trying to keep track of
users of open source projects not really doable in that way.

When server space/download volume is expensive you really want others to
mirror and distribute your sources.

And for ads a simple page hit count is enough, no need to ask for things
like email address etc.

-Chas

- Erwin

···

On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 20:49, Charles Ehrlich wrote:
--
       Erwin Rol Software Engineering - http://www.erwinrol.com/

Charles Ehrlich wrote:

...
This information can then be used at some future date to support efforts to develop an ongoing funding source for Radiance--or at least paying for the server space. I know how much everyone hates web page ads, but Peter Apian-Bennewitz's benevolence may not last for ever, even if he remains at his current place of employment.

Don't worry too much, - FhG ISE is upgrading its Internet connection to 100MBit in January 2004, and the placement there is fairly independent of my theoretical employment situation with them. I also don't see that I'm getting unstuck with Radiance anyway soon. The initial reason for starting radiance-online three years ago was the thought that I'll wake up one morning and have to use Microsoft products for my simulations...

regarding the anon CVS server: The port's not switched through in the firewall and I'm quite happy not to watch another port for security leaks. There aren't compelling reasons for anon CVS access at this time, IMHO, although it may be common with other software projects: Writing is coordinated by just two folks, who have write access and reading is fairly constant over time since functionality doesn't change that frequently. Most changes are either minor or opsys related and shouldn't require a frequent CVS sync, if the local current version runs fine.

-Peter

···

--
pab-opto, Freiburg, Germany, www.pab-opto.de

No need to continue discussion on this. I agree that the e-mail compile notification shall be removed -- it was really negligence on my part that it wasn't gone in 3.5. I don't even know what becomes of those e-mails, if they're saved or not. As for the license text, that needs to be updated as well. Again, my fault.

Thanks for pointing these things out!
-Greg

···

From: Erwin Rol <[email protected]>
Date: December 9, 2003 10:42:03 AM PST
To: Radiance Development <[email protected]>

On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 14:14, Georg Mischler wrote:

Erwin Rol wrote:

Hello all,

Hello neighbour! (well, almost :wink:

I noticed that the license text in the makeall file is different from
the license text on the website. The one in the makeall file still has
the old license I think ?

Looks like it, yes. I'm not into that topic in detail, but it
seems to make sense to have the same language in both places,
so we should probably update the build scripts.

Secondly the makeall file has a "phone home" function wich i think is
normally only something for spyware/adware like programs and not for
opensource projects. If the developers are interested in hearing who is
using what version of radiance they could simply ask if people would
want to mail them that information.

While I share your concerns about spyware in general, I think the
comparison is a little far fetched here. We're not monitoring
your surfing habits or anything...

I have a hard time seeing what kind of data protection problems
the transmission of the following information could cause
(together with your e-mail address):

  char VersionID[]="RADIANCE 3.6a lastmod Mon Nov 17 21:30:59 CET
    2003 by gm on local";

On the other hand, I have no idea how useful the data collected
like this over the years at LBNL really is. I think it *was*
useful at one time, in order to justify funding. Since funding
out of their regular budget has stopped long ago, and a growing
number of users either download Radiance in binary form or use
one of the available Windows versions, it's probably not as
helpful anymore today. I certainly wouldn't miss this "feature"
if it went away.

If there is really interest in this info a better way would be a form on
the download page where you can (on voluntarily basis) give your email
address when downloading the tar ball.

Don't get me wrong, I also like to hear from people that use the few
opensource programs i wrote, I just think thats up to those people and
not up to me.

-schorsch

- Erwin

A P.S. on this. I've made the change to makeall, but it hasn't been executing the newuser script or displayed the outdated license since the 3.5 release. I took it out all the same and substituted with a "more src/common/copyright.h" agreement.

-Greg

···

From: Greg Ward <[email protected]>
Date: December 9, 2003 10:23:28 PM PST

No need to continue discussion on this. I agree that the e-mail compile notification shall be removed -- it was really negligence on my part that it wasn't gone in 3.5. I don't even know what becomes of those e-mails, if they're saved or not. As for the license text, that needs to be updated as well. Again, my fault.

Thanks for pointing these things out!
-Greg