Re: Resolution 2018-07-11.mm.1: Arch Linux 32 as associated project

I'd like to propose the following resolution for the August meeting:

Resolution 2018-07-11.mm.1: Arch Linux 32 as associated project

WHEREAS

1. Arch Linux 32 is a substantial and significant Free Software project.

2. The Arch Linux 32 developers would like SPI's support and assistance,
including taking donations.

THE SPI BOARD RESOLVES THAT

1. Arch Linux 32 is formally invited to become an SPI Associated
Project, according to the SPI Framework for Associated Projects, SPI
Resolution 1998-11-16.iwj.1-amended-2004-08-10.iwj.1, a copy of which
can be found at
https://www.spi-inc.org/corporate/resolutions/2004/2004-08-10.iwj.1/

2. Erich Eckner is recognised by SPI as the authoritative decision maker
and SPI liaison for Arch Linux 32. Successors will be appointed by the
outgoing SPI liaison, or if the current SPI liaison is unavailable or
refuses to appoint a successor, by a simple majority vote by the current
master key holders of Arch Linux 32.

3. This invitation will lapse, if not accepted, 60 days after it is
approved by the SPI Board.

--
Martin Michlmayr
https://www.cyrius.com/

Hi Martin,

On 07/11/2018 03:57 PM, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> I'd like to propose the following resolution for the August meeting:
>
> Resolution 2018-07-11.mm.1: Arch Linux 32 as associated project
>
> WHEREAS
>
> 1. Arch Linux 32 is a substantial and significant Free Software project.
>
What's "Arch Linux 32"? What's its relationship with Arch Linux?

Cheers,
Julien

* Julien Cristau <jcristau(at)debian(dot)org> [2018-07-12 19:14]:
> > I'd like to propose the following resolution for the August meeting:
> >
> > Resolution 2018-07-11.mm.1: Arch Linux 32 as associated project
> >
> > WHEREAS
> >
> > 1. Arch Linux 32 is a substantial and significant Free Software project.
> >
> What's "Arch Linux 32"? What's its relationship with Arch Linux?

My understanding is that Arch Linux 32 is a completely independent
effort from Arch Linux. However, I confirmed with Aaron from Arch
Linux that they are fine with their trademark being used that way.

--
Martin Michlmayr
https://www.cyrius.com/

Arch Linux used to support older 32but architectures, but those were
deprecated some time ago. The arch32 guys stepped up and took on the 32 bit
architecture support. So they are related, but independent.

- Aaron

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018, 1:17 PM Martin Michlmayr <tbm(at)cyrius(dot)com> wrote:

> * Julien Cristau <jcristau(at)debian(dot)org> [2018-07-12 19:14]:
> > > I'd like to propose the following resolution for the August meeting:
> > >
> > > Resolution 2018-07-11.mm.1: Arch Linux 32 as associated project
> > >
> > > WHEREAS
> > >
> > > 1. Arch Linux 32 is a substantial and significant Free Software
> project.
> > >
> > What's "Arch Linux 32"? What's its relationship with Arch Linux?
>
> My understanding is that Arch Linux 32 is a completely independent
> effort from Arch Linux. However, I confirmed with Aaron from Arch
> Linux that they are fine with their trademark being used that way.
>
> --
> Martin Michlmayr
> https://www.cyrius.com/
>

On 07/12/2018 11:14 AM, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Julien Cristau <jcristau(at)debian(dot)org> [2018-07-12 19:14]:
>>> I'd like to propose the following resolution for the August meeting:
>>>
>>> Resolution 2018-07-11.mm.1: Arch Linux 32 as associated project
>>>
>>> WHEREAS
>>>
>>> 1. Arch Linux 32 is a substantial and significant Free Software project.
>>>
>> What's "Arch Linux 32"? What's its relationship with Arch Linux?
> My understanding is that Arch Linux 32 is a completely independent
> effort from Arch Linux. However, I confirmed with Aaron from Arch
> Linux that they are fine with their trademark being used that way.

I think it would be good to have a link to the trademark policy, perhaps
even in the resolution. It isn't like we haven't heard of FOSS projects
getting a little touchy after the fact.

JD

>

--
Command Prompt, Inc. || http://the.postgres.company/ || @cmdpromptinc
*** A fault and talent of mine is to tell it exactly how it is. ***
PostgreSQL centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Advocate: @amplifypostgres || Learn: https://postgresconf.org
***** Unless otherwise stated, opinions are my own. *****

* Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> [2018-07-12 12:12]:
> I think it would be good to have a link to the trademark policy,
> perhaps even in the resolution. It isn't like we haven't heard of
> FOSS projects getting a little touchy after the fact.

It might be a good idea to have a (simple) trademark agreement which
outlines under which conditions Arch Linux 32 can use the "Arch Linux"
name and under which they would have to rename.

e.g. recompiling source from Arch Linux without modification is fine.
Recompiling source from Arch Linux with modification for x86 is ok.
Recompiling source from Arch Linux with _other_ modification: probably not fine.
Using Debian instead of Arch Linux: rename ;)

--
Martin Michlmayr
https://www.cyrius.com/

Hi Martin,

your list looks good, but I'd like to include the following items:

1st:
Configurational changes we deem necessary to make Arch Linux 32 running
and maintainable (e.g. we obviously have a separate mirror list and an
extra keyring). - Or did you mean to cover this in your 2nd point?

2nd:
Recompiling older packages from Arch Linux and/or the Arch User
Repository. (There have been cases where a package was dropped on Arch
Linux, due to it's arcaneness - but x86 users still wanted it)

Aaron, can you give us formal approval on the list of deviations we're
allowed to make while still calling us "Arch Linux 32"?

regards,
Erich

On 13.07.2018 15:01, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Joshua D. Drake <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> [2018-07-12 12:12]:
>> I think it would be good to have a link to the trademark policy,
>> perhaps even in the resolution. It isn't like we haven't heard of
>> FOSS projects getting a little touchy after the fact.
>
> It might be a good idea to have a (simple) trademark agreement which
> outlines under which conditions Arch Linux 32 can use the "Arch Linux"
> name and under which they would have to rename.
>
> e.g. recompiling source from Arch Linux without modification is fine.
> Recompiling source from Arch Linux with modification for x86 is ok.
> Recompiling source from Arch Linux with _other_ modification: probably not fine.
> Using Debian instead of Arch Linux: rename ;)
>