aports issueshttps://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/alpine/aports/-/issues2020-05-09T10:17:06Zhttps://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/alpine/aports/-/issues/9676Alpine 3.8.1 Minirootfs license information2020-05-09T10:17:06ZAthi Nivas Alpine 3.8.1 Minirootfs license informationHi,
We are using Alpine 3.8.1 minirootfs
http://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.8/releases/x86\_64/alpine-minirootfs-3.8.1-x86\_64.tar.gz
But we are unable to find any license related information for it.
Could you share the detail...Hi,
We are using Alpine 3.8.1 minirootfs
http://dl-cdn.alpinelinux.org/alpine/v3.8/releases/x86\_64/alpine-minirootfs-3.8.1-x86\_64.tar.gz
But we are unable to find any license related information for it.
Could you share the details of same.
Thanks,
Athi
*(from redmine: issue id 9676, created on 2018-11-22)*https://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/alpine/aports/-/issues/11426Alpine Minirootfs license information2020-05-09T10:16:38ZAlexander AxjonowAlpine Minirootfs license informationHi,
we would like to use the latest alpine minirootfs but we are unable to find any license information, so that we can't use it in our company. Could you please provide the details?
Best regards and many thanks,
AlexHi,
we would like to use the latest alpine minirootfs but we are unable to find any license information, so that we can't use it in our company. Could you please provide the details?
Best regards and many thanks,
Alexhttps://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/alpine/aports/-/issues/12331elastic licensing changes: removal from aports2021-01-21T04:28:08ZDrew DeVaultelastic licensing changes: removal from aportselastic has changed their license, and no longer meets the requirements for inclusion in aports.
cc @jirutka, the maintainer of the packages in testing.elastic has changed their license, and no longer meets the requirements for inclusion in aports.
cc @jirutka, the maintainer of the packages in testing.https://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/alpine/aports/-/issues/15193HashiCorp license change2023-11-27T10:00:32ZLeon MarzHashiCorp license changeHashiCorp just changed the license of its software to the Business Source License 1.1 (SPDX identifier `BUSL-1.1`) [[1]](https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-adopts-business-source-license)[[2]](https://www.hashicorp.com/license-faq)...HashiCorp just changed the license of its software to the Business Source License 1.1 (SPDX identifier `BUSL-1.1`) [[1]](https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-adopts-business-source-license)[[2]](https://www.hashicorp.com/license-faq)[[3]](https://www.hashicorp.com/bsl). This change affects:
- community/terraform
- community/packer
- community/vault
- community/consul
- community/nomad
As a [not-yet-member of the-not-yet-official license team](https://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/alpine/tsc/-/issues/6), I would like to try to clarify the new license a bit:
__The new license is not open source.__
On the SPDX license page [[4]](https://spdx.org/licenses/BUSL-1.1.html), the notes clearly states:
> The Business Source License [...] is not an Open Source license.
This sentence also appears on the MariaDB page of the license [[5]](https://mariadb.com/bsl11/), who created it in the first place.
Fedora gives further evidence, as this license is in the list of Not-Allowed Licenses [[6]](https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/not-allowed-licenses/).
---
> The Licensor hereby grants you the right to copy, modify, create derivative works, redistribute, and make non-production use of the Licensed Work.
The word that makes this license not opensource is `non-production`, which violates point 6 of the OSD [[7]](https://opensource.org/osd/) as well as the proposed Alpine license policy [[8]](https://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/lmarz/license-policy/-/blob/main/policy.md) "No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor". Production is a part of a Field of Endeavor, often a business.
In conclusion, I don't think we can allow the new versions of HashiCorps software in aports. I would suggest to not update these packages as long as no one complains, since the current versions are still open source. When the demand gets high we could switch to forks which are still active and look like they might be further maintained.
---
[1] https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-adopts-business-source-license
[2] https://www.hashicorp.com/license-faq
[3] https://www.hashicorp.com/bsl
[4] https://spdx.org/licenses/BUSL-1.1.html
[5] https://mariadb.com/bsl11/
[6] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/not-allowed-licenses/
[7] https://opensource.org/osd/
[8] https://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/lmarz/license-policy/-/blob/main/policy.md3.19.0