Moving svn to another contrury or not

[Magnus Olsen]

here is a letter from JvA. 
As most people know we have talk to move svn to another place. 


Dear ReactOS Crew,

I spoke today with Lysators highest administrator Kalle, and he told me
that there should be no problem what so ever for Lysator to host you.
However, in order for us to host you we need a letter from you where you
ask us to host you, and specify what you want to use the server for.
This letter is needed for bureaucratic reasons.

The root group needs to officially grant you the right to be hosted in
our server hall, and marked as a Lysator-project. What the root group
wants to know is what you intend to use the server for and what ports
you need open in the firewall. The security rules in Lysator strictly
says that only Lysator members are allowed to have administrator/root
accounts on the servers in the server hall. The person who would
administrate your server would be me. People outside Lysator, like the
ReactOS developers, are however allowed to have normal SSH-accounts.

Bandwidth is not a problem. Kalle told me that Lysator has been granted
a secondary gbit-connection if the current one isn't enough. By the way,
the server hall has UPS:es to make sure the servers are online even if
there are would be electrical difficulties.

When you have had a meeting and decided what you want hosted in the
Lysator server hall, send me a letter where you ask us to host you and
I'll give it to Kalle. When you officially have been granted to be
hosted by us, you need to supply us with a server, 1U or 2U. If you
want, I could build it for you here in Linköping if you collect money
and let GreatLord buy the parts. The OS that the server would run would
be Gentoo Linux. I will of course install Apache, SVN, cross-compile GCC
and whatever you need on the server for you.

Best regards,
Fredrik Smedberg (JvA)

[Rick Langschultz]

i don't think that the SVN server should be moved to another country  
for reasons of Reverse engineering. I think ReactOS should have no  
Reverse Engineered code within it. Reverse Engineering could be bad  
for the projects publicity and code-base. If you did want to mirror  
the SVN repository for localization purposes, or a faster connection  
that would be great. I think that reverse engineering of the  
Microsoft Code is wrong!!! And if programmers within this project  
want to reverse engineer they should start their own projects, with  
their own names, and use their own code. How would you like your  
product(s) to be stolen?
On Feb 2, 2006, at 1:32 AM, Magnus Olsen wrote:

>   here is a letter from JvA.
>  As most people know we have talk to move svn to another place.
>
>  Dear ReactOS Crew,
>
>  I spoke today with Lysators highest administrator Kalle, and he  
>  told me
>  that there should be no problem what so ever for Lysator to host you.
>  However, in order for us to host you we need a letter from you  
>  where you
>  ask us to host you, and specify what you want to use the server for.
>  This letter is needed for bureaucratic reasons.
>
>  The root group needs to officially grant you the right to be hosted in
>  our server hall, and marked as a Lysator-project. What the root group
>  wants to know is what you intend to use the server for and what ports
>  you need open in the firewall. The security rules in Lysator strictly
>  says that only Lysator members are allowed to have administrator/root
>  accounts on the servers in the server hall. The person who would
>  administrate your server would be me. People outside Lysator, like the
>  ReactOS developers, are however allowed to have normal SSH-accounts.
>
>  Bandwidth is not a problem. Kalle told me that Lysator has been  
>  granted
>  a secondary gbit-connection if the current one isn't enough. By the  
>  way,
>  the server hall has UPS:es to make sure the servers are online even if
>  there are would be electrical difficulties.
>
>  When you have had a meeting and decided what you want hosted in the
>  Lysator server hall, send me a letter where you ask us to host you and
>  I'll give it to Kalle. When you officially have been granted to be
>  hosted by us, you need to supply us with a server, 1U or 2U. If you
>  want, I could build it for you here in Linköping if you collect money
>  and let GreatLord buy the parts. The OS that the server would run  
>  would
>  be Gentoo Linux. I will of course install Apache, SVN, cross- 
>  compile GCC
>  and whatever you need on the server for you.
>
>  Best regards,
>  Fredrik Smedberg (JvA)
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

[Jerry]

"I think that reverse engineering of the Microsoft Code is wrong!!!"
According to US law that is incorrect.
(reference 1 <http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise48.html>, 
reference 2 
<http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t17t20+122+0++%28%29%20%20AND%20%28%2817%29%20ADJ%20USC%29%3ACITE%20AND%20%28USC%20w%2F10%20%281201%29%29%3ACITE%20%20AND%20%28CHAPTER%20ADJ%20%2812%29%29%3AEXPCITE%20%20%20%20%20%20%20>)


Title 17, Chapter 12, Section 1201 of the US Code:

      (f) Reverse Engineering. - (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of
    subsection (a)(1)(A), a person who has lawfully obtained the right
    to use a copy of a computer program may circumvent a technological
    measure that effectively controls access to a particular portion of
    that program for the sole purpose of identifying and analyzing
    those elements of the program that are necessary to achieve
    interoperability of an independently created computer program with
    other programs, and that have not previously been readily available
    to the person engaging in the circumvention, to the extent any such
    acts of identification and analysis do not constitute infringement
    under this title.


      (2) Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (a)(2) and (b),
    a person may develop and employ technological means to circumvent a
    technological measure, or to circumvent protection afforded by a
    technological measure, in order to enable the identification and
    analysis under paragraph (1), or for the purpose of enabling
    interoperability of an independently created computer program with
    other programs, if such means are necessary to achieve such
    interoperability, to the extent that doing so does not constitute
    infringement under this title.


      (3) The information acquired through the acts permitted under
    paragraph (1), and the means permitted under paragraph (2), may be
    made available to others if the person referred to in paragraph (1)
    or (2), as the case may be, provides such information or means
    solely for the purpose of enabling interoperability of an
    independently created computer program with other programs, and to
    the extent that doing so does not constitute infringement under
    this title or violate applicable law other than this section.
      

      (4) For purposes of this subsection, the term "interoperability"
    means the ability of computer programs to exchange information, and
    of such programs mutually to use the information which has been
    exchanged.



-- 
Listen to Americas Debate Radio at 9 o'clock eastren! 
http://radio.americasdebate.net/listen/low (Dial Up)
http://radio.americasdebate.net/listen/    (BroadBand)

Call in at:
1-888-DEBATE-5
1-912-342-2345
Skype: callto://americasdebate

[Maarten Bosma]

Hi,

Jerry wrote:
>   "I think that reverse engineering of the
> Microsoft Code is wrong!!!"
>  According to US law that is incorrect.
>  [snip] 
I don't think that he meant legally wrong but about morally wrong.

>   The reason to move svn is many. and we have talk about
> moving svn to another place. We have not yet make a final destions on it yet. 
>   revers eng is allown in alot of country 
>      diffent is in USA only one way todo revers eng have been tested in court and what is
> okay or not. to use other metod in usa is unclear. 
>  Moving the svn. is not avoid the current problem and the svn are in dermark already. 
Could you name the reason again ? I must have missed the discussion.


Maarten Bosma