Loud ramblings of a Software Artisan

One more time a Free Software project advocate using a closed and proprietary technology to view their announcement. See for yourself: http://www.kde.org/announcements/4.2/desktop.php. Apparently the KDE4 release party video fiasco was not enough (using the same technology).

<Nightrose> hub: yea - i can't change it now due to translations being done and so on - but we will keep it in mind for the next one - you are not the only one to complain :/

This come from the people that complain each time a website reject Konqueror (which is wrong too), and that said Konqueror is always ignored by the proprietary vendor.

Now I need a refill for b.s. my allergy meds.

At least Mozilla is pushing Ogg/Theora.

Update: I messed with the link, it has been fixed.

Not so hot news, but Atheros finally released the HAL source code under a Free Software license. Given that they always claimed it was because of the FCC, I now wonder where that argument will stand now.

Update: it appears that it is not the ath_hal source code. (source) As I understand it, it is the same source code that make ath_hal in MadWifi. This means that we can get a really Free Software madwifi. Apparently the ath5k authors are already using it to fix issues with the in-kernel driver.

Kudos to Atheros, you did the right thing.

You probably read it on /. or elsewhere, but here is the important part of a PR about a lawsuit:

FACIL, a non-profit association, which promotes the collective appropriation of Free Software, contests the Quebec government purchasing methods for software used within public administrations. FACIL has filed a motion before the Quebec Superior Court in order to bring an end to these methods which the association believes are not in the best interest of the Quebec government, but more importantly, not in accordance with the regulation for supply contracts, construction contracts and service contracts of government departments and public bodies (R.Q. c. A-6.01, r.0.03).

In short when the Québec government spend millions of tax payer money buying proprietary software, after bending its rules to not have to call for bids, it does not get unnoticed. The fact that only Free Software advocate are raising the issues is just revealing.

It started a while back, in March, with a potential bidder: Savoir Faire Linux' declarative judgment request

Coverage:

• Official press release
• CBC
• Michael Geist
• Technaute (in French)
• The Inquirer
• Savoir Faire Linux own story (in French)

Debian publish a vulnerability and Free Software development halts to a grind. Film at 11.

source

10 years ago, almost, Mozilla was released as Free Software under the NPL. It was supposed to be Netscape 5. I built it on a K6-200 with 64MB of RAM which was powerful at the time (running Debian)

Yesterday, I finally rebuilt it for the second time, using the Firefox 3.0b4 code base. I'm not sure how much code is in common either. The build was smooth and, by far, much easier than OOo. Actually the fun part is that in some configuration OOo leads to building xulrunner :-)

Now let's learn XPCOM the hard way.

I think that this time I can say "I told you so".

In 2005/09 I posted this to rant about the use of hidden and undocumented MacOS X API in WebKit.

In 2008/02, the Mozilla folks post this, this and this where they denounce that issue.

The difference is that at that time I didn't bother to provide data like performance comparison, probably because I decided that it was someone else problem.

To add the these post, Microsoft actually got sued, back in the early 90s, for using undocumented APIs in order to be ahead of their competition in the space of... office applications. And Apple employees still continue to drink the KoolAid claiming that one need to file a bug... or that these are not API bit SPI (sic)^[1].

This is just one of the many frustration I no longer get by choosing only Free Software.

Alvaro: I hate to be the devil advocate, but claiming that Java is a Free (-Software) platform is a bit inaccurate. So far, Sun still hasn't released a fully functionnal JDK under a Free Software license, and AFAIK the Free Software re-implementation of Java are not up to either, even though IcedTea is probably going in the right direction.

Looks like a recent edit of the HTML5 draft about video support bent to the pressure of some corporation: Ogg Vorbis and Theora removed from the HTML5 spec.

See the diff. It is interesting to read the commit message:

Lift the cat who was amongst the pigeons up and put him back on his pedestal for now. (remove requirement on ogg for now)

I'll let you make your own opinion on the matter, but this is clearly not the right direction.

Dalibor comment on the Android SDK licensing. And Paul open questions about the announcement of Open Handset Alliance.

Happy to see that I'm not the only one thinking about that. I believe more in GMAE, and OpenMoko intents, as well as Nokia's, are much clearer.

Gimp 2.4 has been released . And now this piece of Free Software as a website that is as annoying as various non-free software by requiring to install a piece of non-free software to view content.

Welcome Gimp to the land of the non-Free hype. See for yourself.

Update: as Alan commented, bug 489958 has been filed.

From Boud of Krita fame: LGM 2008 will be held in Wroclaw, Poland from May 8 to 11th 2008. See the website.

For those asking, LGM stands for Libre Graphics Meeting, and is the meeting of Free Software for graphism. This include GIMP, Krita, Inkscape, Scribus and Blender.

tbf, I agree with what you said. Another thing that made me cough during the keynote is when Alex^[1] said that Flash did address the problem of video codecs. I'm sorry it does not. It just move it in the wrong direction, away from freedom.

The main problem with video (and sound) codecs is that they are patent encumbered. Therefore most of them can't be redistributed without violating some obscure patents in some obscure country. That's what Ogg (Vorbis and Theora) is addressing, the problem with Ogg being that no proprietary vendor has the courage nor the interest to push it forward^[2]. As for moving to Flash it is even worse: there is no reliable Free Software implementation of the technology^[3], the video codecs are even more encumbered (hello VP6), not solving the distribution problem (actually the Free Software implementations relies on the same code as the one I mentionned above, causing the same headache) And the current non-Free implementation of Flash is not even re-distribuable in its binary form, nor does it run on more than one variety of Linux arch: x86^[4]. And given how reliable Adobe have been providing non-Free Linux support for Flash in the past^[5], I'd guess pushing Flash is like putting all your eggs in the basket whose handles are about to break.

I don't use Linux because it is cool, I use Linux for the freedom it provides me. If I wanted to be cool, I would use MacOS X on a MacBookPro, have an iPod video with the latest "cool" song and video DRM'ed purchase on iTMS, would have bought a locked iPhone I couldn't use as a phone, and spend my time on MySpace, youtube, instead of trying push Free Software forward with all the other Free Software hackers.

According to CUPS.org, Apple has purchased the company behind CUPS and the Copyright of CUPS source code. Apparently this does not affect licensing of the current version of CUPS, still under GPL2/LGPL2, but I wouldn't be that optimist about the future. Note that in the past Apple had already paid a premium for a license exception that allowed them to evade the GPL2, and even though they published their modification to CUPS itself, they never released the whole stack as they would have if it at been GPL2.

Time will tell... but I'd recommend starting to mirror everything just in case Apple pull the plugs.

Note: this is a pessimist view. But it just remind why at one point copyright assignment might not be good.

Nothing was lost in the browser and in the last years, Firefox has taken back some point in the browser market. So interestingly that after disbanding the team and not doing anything on IE for 5 years but plugging security holes, Microsoft decided to release IE 7, solely for XP SP2 and upward, in the hope to regain some market.

But this is not without counting on Safari.

Safari by itself made Microsoft not develop IE Mac anymore a by itself took a good chunk as the Mac market is somewhat growing a bit. The interesting part is that it is not based on Gecko, but on KHTML, turned into WebKit. Lars Knoll interview gives us a brief overview of the past and the future of KHTML and WebKit development, notably how Apple collaboration ended up working well and how KDE4 will have KHTML coming directly from Apple's repository^[1]. Now the WebKit for Windows is about to disturb the source: Apple's Windows port did land in the repository, and that port has apparently no relation with the non contribution from Adobe for WebKit + Cairo on Windows^[2]. I'm still unsure of the direct benefit of the port source code for Free Software, as it apparently use a mix between Windows native GDI and Apple own proprietary CoreGraphics (delivered as a non-free DLL^[3]), but nonetheless.

Now how will that still matter for Free Software?

It brings a standard compliant Free Software web rendering engine a broader audience, on that it is different from Gecko. Competition is good, and diversity is good. This engine is at the heart of KDE4, and is being brought to Gtk by the work put in by various contributors, including Alp's port to Maemo (Alp, you rock dude) making it valuable for GMAE and Gnome in general. Nobody will argue, Gnome is in dire need to something better than Gecko for its HTML needs: DevHelp, Yelp, Liferea, Evolution, etc would all benefit from it. All the enhancements made to the main engine, including support for new standards will directly serve the purpose of any Free Software using it.

Even more, being the browser inside the iPhone (and actually Apple's blessed development platform for the iPhone^[4]), this could leverage enough market share to make WebKit a major browser and have actually enough power to convince the Web 2.0 developers to ensure their development are compatible^[5] with it. And that is something noticeable. Remember when IE was the only browser tested and that developer didn't care to fix their mistake or standard conformance because anything else was too small for them?

I discovered today pyexiv2, which is a Python interface to the infamous Exiv2, a GPL library to read and write Exif and IPTC/IIM metadata from JPEG and various camera RAW file. Too bad I can't reuse the exiv2 code in libopenraw as it is GPL and not LGPL.^[1]

pyexiv2 is actually an exemple on how easy it is to write Python module in C++ using Boost.Python