Index: [Article Count Order] [Thread]

Date:  Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:12:36 +0900
From:  Yutaka Yasuda <yasuda (at mark)>
Subject:  [coba-e:01685] Re: Ruby project license
To:  coba-e (at mark)
Message-Id:  <041215091236.M0429137 (at mark)>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Sat, 11 Dec 2004 16:56:20 +0100".	<7ECAEE9C5D2AD34893C7FC07786892551A34@fox1>
X-Mail-Count: 01685

Hi Bob,

There are a few BlueQuartz/Cobalt clone based system providing 
companies, so I think it is better to accept commercial information 
from business side. Thanks for your information.

And I am very glad to hear this news. So I know there are 4 companies
which is developing and sell their own Cobalt clone software in Japan.
But the other country's situation is not the same.

Blue Quartz is open and free, now and future. It's okay, and enough
for engineers and skillfull Linux users.
But we know the business activity is very important for *real* 
end-users who need appliance solution. 
(Because Blue Quartz community cannot make any help desk by phone!)

Yesterday, I heard about BlueQuartz hosting service is available
in France. I believe BlueQuartz project is going on the right way.

Cobalt never die. :-)


> Since this keeps popping up every now and then, please allow me to 'abuse'
> the list to handle it in detail this time.
> Ruby 550, initial
> -----------------
> This is nothing more then a write-up of how to install the very first version
> of the BlueQuartz on RH9. 
> The reason for calling it Ruby is the mix between RedHat and the Cobalts.
> Since was almost 100% cobalt related at that time, a clear marking
> was needed for the vistors that these documenst did NOT concern the blue
> boxes, to avoid them accidentaly installing on the 'real' machines.
> The function of these 'Ruby 550' documents was merely to standarize between a
> number of developers so we would know the exact steps and fixes the other
> would have used. Since there is not a single character of code involved, just
> text documents, there is no need to even think of anythging in terms of
> licenses.
> An old document concerning the 550 can for instance still be found here:
> . 
> Later on, the 550 document has been moved here:
> As you can see it is nothing
> more then a type this type that page.
> Ruby 551 (with or without rglue)
> --------------------------------
> The BlueQuartz project soon released the march version of the software, which
> was quite an upgraded version. A lot of people turned to me for help, and it
> was quickly clear that a standariced install and patch tool would be very
> usefull. As some of you will know, the stock RH9 contained root exploits on
> things like SSH and apache, and popping these boxes onto the net unpatched
> was not exactly a good idea. 
> At that time, I basicaly had the idea to work through 551 numbers while
> adding stuff to the patcher/installer (rglue) and a copy of the bluequartz
> source tree at the same time, and THEN introduce a version 552 which
> incorprated a patched up BlueQuartz, and a seperate installer. Some people
> more wise then me talked to me about 'forking' the bluequartz stuff, and that
> idea AND the modified bluequartz code was abandonned. (it has never been
> online for download).
> So, the new situation was that i had a partly finished install tool (rglue),
> and was stuck with a number of things i wanted fixed in the bluequartz tree
> (.htaccess, snmp, cgi and so on). At the same time, making further changes in
> the system would mean i would have to modify the howto, therefore breaking
> the '551 spec'
> so, on to
> Ruby 552 (with rglue)
> ---------------------
> So here we are at 552. The base system is 100% Bluequartz on RH9, and the
> users have a few options;
> - user the rglue tool to quickly install and patch things
> - follow the documents and do it yourself if you dont like that kind of
> automation (
> - Or, dont use the tool at all and upgrade the packages you want (
> ) for those who know what and how they want it.
> So much for the versions, on to free as in no costs, or freedom
> Licensing
> ---------
> 550. had no software, BlueQuartz is open source. end of story
> 551. saw the first version of rglue as an installer. At that time, there had
> no decission been made if it would be open source or just free software. That
> versions where free software as in 'no cost'.  At the same time, a server
> appliance was introduced which people can buy. On that machine, either a
> SuSE/webmin, RedHat/Ruby can be installed. Both packages are free. The price
> is purely the server appliance, wheter you have something put on it or not. (
> ). My exact words about the
> appliance where:
> [quote]
> Ruby is and will be downloadable. The appliance is just one way to run it.
> The appliance will be offered with win2k3, ruby and suse/webmin, so it is not
> specificaly targeted for ruby, it just plays well with it, and can be handy
> for people who don't want to do installs themselves. Revenue of the appliance
> will also justify more time and money spend on Ruby.
> [/quote]
> in short, 551 was 'free software' as in no cost.
> 552. In the same forums where i once said rglue was 'just' free software, it
> was also announced that it was being open sourced. (for instance, see
> )
> As for open source, these are the exact words in the FAQ:
> [quote]
> Q: Is rglue open source / are you trying to lock me in
> A: yes, it is open source. see the developer website
> (
> [/quote]
> Lastly, another valid concern made by some and a bit related to this posts is
> the download server. Those who dont want to use it can simply copy the
> structure and point there hosts file to a controlled personal server for the
> time being. 0.30 will have a configuration option with which you can setup
> your own download server.
> The version numbering has been far from perfect from my side. I have even
> named the 553 numbers at a certain time altough i never got round to using
> them. The Ruby thing has grown way beyond what i expected. The idea was to
> have it for out own customer base and perhaps a few interested others to make
> installs quick and easy. We now see a base of over 800 unique ip numbers
> using the tool, even in heavy production sites. To minimize the 'damage' from
> the unclear version numbers we now only refer to it as version 55x for
> BlueQuartz on RedHat9. 
> There will be no FC1 version. There will be an also open sourced 56x FC3
> version once the BlueQuartz team upgrades to it. 
> If you are still reading here, i hope i didnt' bore you to much :)
> Bob (aka dePoPo).