4 ms·

Why? Isn't homebrew just a package manager, and why should a non free license restrict them of including HashiCorp tools? Or do they have a policy only to inclu

by andix 3y ago

Why? Isn't homebrew just a package manager, and why should a non free license restrict them of including HashiCorp tools? Or do they have a policy only to include free software. Edit: yes they have quite strict guidelines: https://docs.brew.sh/License-Guidelines https://docs.brew.sh/License-Guidelines

vmarchaud 3y ago
They do have a policy to only include free software [1]: > We only accept formulae that use a Debian Free Software Guidelines license or are released into the public domain following DFSG Guidelines on Public Domain software into homebrew/core. [1]: https://docs.brew.sh/License-Guidelines https://docs.brew.sh/License-Guidelines
- INTPenis 3y ago
  But the license hasn't changed, so that raises the question of why was it included in the first place?
  - chmod775 3y ago
    The license did change. From MPL 2.0 to BSL.
  - Hackbraten 3y ago
    The license will change to BUSL for all upcoming upstream releases. [1] [1]: https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-updates-licensing-faq-based-on-community-questions https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-updates-licensing-f...
  - slikrick 3y ago
    did you miss the memo?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- jameshart 3y ago
  In home-brew core. And the reasoning is that home-brew isn't strictly a package manager, it is a dependency installer and builder - it pulls down sources and everything they depend upon (as source packages too, usually), and builds them locally. So as a user of home-brew you're trusting the formulae you install from to be for things you are allowed to pull down and build locally. Licenses matter. Hashicorp (or anyone else) can maintain a source tap of their own - when you opt in to using a third party tap you're trusting that tap's licensing as well. And there's also 'casks' which are for non-source distributions, which home-brew can install as well, where source licensing isn't important.
Hackbraten 3y ago
> Isn't homebrew just a package manager It’s not just a package manager. It’s a piece of software called `brew` (the package manager) but also a package repository called `homebrew-core` to which the software connects by default. The package repository is carefully curated and only accepts open-source licenses. You’re free to use `brew` to tap into whatever repository you like, but TFPR is concerned with the core repository only.
- mdaniel 3y ago
  > also a package repository called `homebrew-core` to which the software connects by default I think that's only true if one does an `export HOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1` otherwise they default to their new JSON API: https://docs.brew.sh/Installation#default-tap-cloning https://docs.brew.sh/Installation#default-tap-cloning and is the only way if one needs to alter any core Formulae: https://docs.brew.sh/FAQ#can-i-edit-formulae-myself https://docs.brew.sh/FAQ#can-i-edit-formulae-myself (which, for clarity, Brew explicitly disavows)
  - Hackbraten 3y ago
    I was referring to the package repository, not a Git repository.
miki123211 3y ago
This is only partially true. By default, homebrew supports (or, in their terminology, taps into) two repositories, homebrew/core and homebrew/casks. Core only takes free software, built by the Homebrew developers itself, installed in /opt/homebrew etc. Casks takes everything under the sun, including commercial software with no available source code. Such software is often downloaded straight from their developers and installed wherever it wishes to be installed, most often in /Applications.

by andix 3y ago

vmarchaud 3y ago

They do have a policy to only include free software [1]: > We only accept formulae that use a Debian Free Software Guidelines license or are released into the public domain following DFSG Guidelines on Public Domain software into homebrew/core. [1]: https://docs.brew.sh/License-Guidelines https://docs.brew.sh/License-Guidelines

INTPenis 3y ago
But the license hasn't changed, so that raises the question of why was it included in the first place?
- chmod775 3y ago
  The license did change. From MPL 2.0 to BSL.
- Hackbraten 3y ago
  The license will change to BUSL for all upcoming upstream releases. [1] [1]: https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-updates-licensing-faq-based-on-community-questions https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-updates-licensing-f...
- slikrick 3y ago
  did you miss the memo?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jameshart 3y ago
In home-brew core. And the reasoning is that home-brew isn't strictly a package manager, it is a dependency installer and builder - it pulls down sources and everything they depend upon (as source packages too, usually), and builds them locally. So as a user of home-brew you're trusting the formulae you install from to be for things you are allowed to pull down and build locally. Licenses matter. Hashicorp (or anyone else) can maintain a source tap of their own - when you opt in to using a third party tap you're trusting that tap's licensing as well. And there's also 'casks' which are for non-source distributions, which home-brew can install as well, where source licensing isn't important.

Hackbraten 3y ago

> Isn't homebrew just a package manager It’s not just a package manager. It’s a piece of software called `brew` (the package manager) but also a package repository called `homebrew-core` to which the software connects by default. The package repository is carefully curated and only accepts open-source licenses. You’re free to use `brew` to tap into whatever repository you like, but TFPR is concerned with the core repository only.

mdaniel 3y ago
> also a package repository called `homebrew-core` to which the software connects by default I think that's only true if one does an `export HOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1` otherwise they default to their new JSON API: https://docs.brew.sh/Installation#default-tap-cloning https://docs.brew.sh/Installation#default-tap-cloning and is the only way if one needs to alter any core Formulae: https://docs.brew.sh/FAQ#can-i-edit-formulae-myself https://docs.brew.sh/FAQ#can-i-edit-formulae-myself (which, for clarity, Brew explicitly disavows)
- Hackbraten 3y ago
  I was referring to the package repository, not a Git repository.

miki123211 3y ago

This is only partially true. By default, homebrew supports (or, in their terminology, taps into) two repositories, homebrew/core and homebrew/casks. Core only takes free software, built by the Homebrew developers itself, installed in /opt/homebrew etc. Casks takes everything under the sun, including commercial software with no available source code. Such software is often downloaded straight from their developers and installed wherever it wishes to be installed, most often in /Applications.