3rd Party Libs in CVS as well as non-GPLv2 Code in CVS

Thanks for helping cleaning out the Drupal CVS. We will bring the respective authors' attention to the listed files. I read "#156221 by mfer: Added jQuery 1.2.6 compatible replacement for farbtastic.js." so it's a significant change to farbtastic so unless there is a specific equal version to it (somewhat doubt) then we need this.

In defense of jQuery Update, it's a replacement for the core jquery.js, which we already distribute from Drupal.org. I therefore think it's acceptable for it to break the rule and distribute jquery*.js in this instance, but am not overly fussed about it.

Side note that anyone who hasn't seen it should read the original issue at hand: #417680: Rokbox module: External libraries committed into CVS.

crystaldawn, there are obviously obvious violations of the CVS policy, and there are grey/cloudy cases, most of which you have posted here and warrant a rational, informative discussion about external code in CVS.

crystaldawn, this is the last warning: back down. Do not throw accusations, lies and half thruths around or face banning from drupal.org.

If we want to discuss files, that's a relevant and important discussion.

Let me summarize the actual policy for 3rd party libs in our CVS.

1) in general 3rd party libs are forbidden.

2) they are even more forbidden if they aren't licensed under GPL (_and_ cannot be relicensed under GPL)

3) Exceptions can be made if the 3rd party lib

a) had to be modified to work with Drupal and this modifications wasn't accepted by the original author

b) is generally difficult to find in the needed version. This is or maybe rather was true for many jQuery plugins.

c) is no longer maintained by the original author

Please review the provided list according to this and contact the authors if any plugins need removing.

How would I like to see these handled? The correct way. We dont go around unpublishing things just because they have files we think should be deleted. No. Instead we give them a few DAYS maybe even weeks to remove them. Not 40, 60, even 300 minutes. Most projects will need to find a way to deal with those files being gone. Like creating new install instructions or maybe setting configs differently, whatever. There is more to it than simply nuking the files in most cases (including my own).

In #417680: Rokbox module: External libraries committed into CVS, you *actively* refused to remove those files, you never asked for time to do so. In your first reply, you marked the issue as "fixed", while not having done anything. In your second reply, you set it to "by design", and actively refused to comply, violently attacking another member of the community.

Improve your attitude towards people, and the attitude of people towards you will improve.

I think #7 should be moved to the handbook. I agree that if a given file can only be found by checking it from some cvs that's beyond the reach of the general Drupal population.

@chx - see Why drupal.org doesn't host GPL-"compatible" code which covers most of that.

crystaldawn: By involving my module and my commits (ctools) in your discussion even though I had nothing to do with any of this, you have engendered even more antipathy toward yourself. For what it's worth, the presence of these files has already been dealt with by the drupal.org staff.

You seem to consistently miss the fact that it was not the files that got it unpublished, it was your refusal to do anything about it and offering either no or very hollow explanations. If you think this is acceptable, you are simply wrong.

You further went on to attack a drupal.org administrator, calling him a troll. Given what sun has contributed to the Drupal project, and how incredibly helpful he has been to many in the community, these attacks paint you in a particularly poor light.

In my opinion, you are consistently displaying an attitude that is not acceptable around drupal.org. Your efforts must turn toward the polite and the cooperative if you expect to actually resolve the issue, and if they remain aggressive and rude, this kind of behavior tends to get banned rather quickly here. Tread lightly, crystaldawn. You are making more enemies than friends here.

@all we already read the riot act to crystaldawn let's discuss files here...

It was dealt with privately by the Drupal Association after a complaint was sent directly to them. mc.js fits both the modified and no longer available clauses, and that version of dimensions.js is also no longer available. Newer versions are but they are for newer versions of jquery.

That said, it's also not your business.

Do we need to provide a list of files dealt with? Add a note to CVS? Something?

Added to the handbook: http://drupal.org/node/422996

Please review that and the cross-linked FAQ page.

I am cleaning up the queue. Is there anything that needs to be done about this?

I just rolled a comment in on the linked handbook page. I left the original comment unpublished - feel free to delete if desired.

It might make sense to move http://drupal.org/node/66113 from the CVS FAQ to the same "Usage policy" book chapter as http://drupal.org/node/422996 since the topics are intimately related.

I guess it has been placed under CVS FAQ because it was a frequently asked question.
It should be possible to move that page to a different chapter (as it should be possible to do with the other pages listed under CVS FAQ), but IMO it makes more sense to leave it where it is.

Marking as Fixed.

As for #22 - as new CVS applicants go through a vetting, they'll be told if their code is GPL/appropiate - older users should know this or find out the hard way.