[08:17] <persia> There was some talk in -release about cleaning up cdimage.ubuntu.com.  I notice that Ubuntu Studio didn't participate in 8.04.2 or 8.04.3 point releases (we did participate in 8.04.1).  If anyone is still running hardy, it might be interesting to work with the testing team come December/January for 8.04.4 (although there's lots of reasons why newer releases are better).
=== bburhans_ is now known as bburhans
[08:35] <astraljava> persia: I should have environment ready by December, so that I can still run Hardy for testing purposes.
[08:36] <persia> astraljava, OK.  You might want to follow up with the #ubuntu-testing folks come November or so, and find out what needs doing, etc.  I'd also suggest confirming with ScottL, just because if we release an 8.04.4, that implies that we also support it.
[08:38] <astraljava> persia: I understand. Okay, I'll join the #, and chat with ScottL to see whether support is provided or not. In theory, I at least could provide it, but I'm not willing to do it alone, as I fear I might not be able to solo it.
[08:39] <persia> Heh, indeed.  That's why it's something to discuss, rather than just a "hey, someone test next time" :)
[08:39] <astraljava> Gotcha. :)
[09:07] <quadrispro> persia, I'd like to re-open a discussion with the upstream of linuxsampler
[09:07] <quadrispro> about the license, obviously
[09:07] <quadrispro> WDYT?
[09:07] <persia> quadrispro, If you like.  I'll wish you luck.
[09:08] <persia> I don't expect the upstream position has or will change.
[09:08] <persia> But I could be needlessly pessimistic about it.
[09:08] <quadrispro> I don't expect it too, but I would like to have an attempt
[09:09] <quadrispro> me too :/
[09:09] <persia> Makes sense.  It's been a while since it last came up.
[09:09] <persia> http://www.linuxsampler.org/downloads.html still has the same text
[09:10] <quadrispro> persia, please help me to re-summarize some good points. First, it doesn't conflict with DFSG only, it breaks GPL
[09:10] <quadrispro> am I right?
[09:10] <persia> I believe so.  Check the ML archives: there's lots of good arguments from the past.
[09:12] <quadrispro> well
[09:12] <quadrispro> I will
[09:13] <quadrispro> hope to see a bit of collaboration
[09:13] <quadrispro> from upstream
[09:24] <persia> quadrispro, You ma also want to explore packaging JSampler and/or jlscp : same upstream, but sane licensing (and don't seem to be in the archives)
[09:26] <quadrispro> ohh, java...
[09:28] <quadrispro> jlscp
[09:29] <persia> glancing at GPL again, I'd think section 1 was the first awkward bit (discussing charging, and warrants), but I'm not an expert about that clause (it's generally the one I pay the least attention).
[09:30] <persia> But it's a clear violation of DFSG#6
[09:30] <quadrispro> " You are NOT ALLOWED to use LinuxSampler source code, libraries or applications in COMMERCIAL hardware or software products without prior written authorization by the authors. [...]"
[09:31] <quadrispro> really, I don't understand the reasons... :/
[09:33] <quadrispro> persia, BTW, I don't have much experience in packaging java stuff, if have time to work on jlscp,jsampler I would give my contribution and upload them to NEW, when ready
[09:34] <quadrispro> if you have time *
[09:34] <persia> I don't remember the specifics, but a couple example reasons I can imagine someone might have would be 1) don't want others to profit from their work without sharing revenues, 2) have used some data only available for non-commercial or research purposes in creating the code, and fear the owner of that data if the code is later used in ways not compatible with the data disclosure agreement, 3) work for an organisation that only allows one 
[09:34] <persia> to release open code for non-commercial purposes, etc.
[09:35] <persia> I don't, nor much interest, really.  From what I understand JSampler/jlscp is just another front-end (like qsampler) to the unfree linuxsampler.
[09:38] <quadrispro> 1) 2) 3) I got it, then... easy: if one wants to prevent that, GPL is not for him
[09:40] <persia> That's my thought.  But there's not a lot of good examples of non-commercial licenses.
[09:40] <persia> I suspect that comes because not so many people want to fund lawyers to inspect and create good ones :)
[09:41] <quadrispro> eheh, it is so :)
[09:46] <persia> Looks like the last messy discussion about it was in early 2008.  Given http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-dev/2008-January/020531.html , I have the impression that there's some strong (although not clearly disclosed) reasons for the restriction.
[09:47]  * persia tries to get back to the regularly scheduled ignoring of linuxsampler :)
[09:49] <quadrispro> oh, having a look
[09:53] <persia> heh: I fail.  So, the trick is that one sells a 1U short-rack audio box, with a program that will automate the download, recompilation, and installation of linuxsampler post-registration :)
[09:53] <persia> One isn't actually selling linuxsampler :)  That said, if it's that easy to get around, there may be some weird reason it's licensed the way it is.
[09:56] <quadrispro> i see
[10:04] <quadrispro> persia, do you have requests for some LV2 plugins that aren't already available in Maverick?
[10:05] <persia> I don't think we can add anything else to Maverick at this point.
[10:05] <persia> But I haven't done a scan of software-that-ought-be-packaged in a good long while.  Maybe someone else has a list?
[10:10] <quadrispro> yep, there is a list
[10:10] <quadrispro> no, at this point we can't add anything new
[10:10] <quadrispro> but I can update my TODO list and work on them for Debian
[10:10] <quadrispro> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/TaskLV2Inclusion
[13:48] <ScottL> astraljava, persia: re: 8.04.04 testing - i'd rather not test for it and then have to support it because 10.04 is far superior in my opinion, that's not a hard position, but just a general leaning
[13:49] <ScottL> persia, quadrispro:  i am thinking of asking rexbron (andrew hunter) to get linuxsampler in his PPA
[13:49] <astraljava> ScottL: Fine by me, I have no big desire for it anyway, was just offering some HDD space for it. :D
[13:50] <ScottL> i had a different opinion before karmic and lucid though :P  i thought hardy was ace
[13:51] <ScottL> seeing how much structural differences and improvements since hardy is amazing and encouraging 
[13:51] <quadrispro> ScottL, the packaging is almost ready to go -> http://git.debian.org/?p=pkg-multimedia/linuxsampler.git
[13:51]  * quadrispro away for a bit
[14:23] <persia> ScottL, Given the license for linuxsampler, I'd strongly recommend thinking twice before asking anyone else to distribute it.  If you're comfortable, that's fine, but ...
[14:24] <persia> ScottL, Also, re: 10.04, we didn't participate in 10.04.1: so we'd probably want to get on the ball if we're to do 10.04.2 (same reasoning as 8.04.4)
[14:25] <ScottL> persia, doh, i already sent a mail to rexbron's mail on the -dev list but at least i did mention there were licensing issues :/
[14:26] <persia> Well, that might work.  If he doesn't feel comfortable distributing, maybe he'll reply that the licensing issues were too many.
[19:42] <ScottL> if anyone is testing maverick can they see if lv2rack or zynjacku will work ?