Add a New Comment (Rich Markup)
Comment Type & Canned Response: None None > Multiple Canned Responses Mailing-list created This will be fixed in the near future. Wrong support: not a project Known issue: will be fixed soon No Response
( Jump to the original submission )
> This is not a php script: > > https://savannah.nongnu.org/js/show-hide.php:
No, but this is not a file, either, this is a URL.
Plainly speaking, what you quote below is the output of that PHP script (it's even not an object code); people who work on Savane will use the text of the script rather than its output.
comment #8:
> > > One might want to work on savannah, and write a script performing certain actions on all php files assuming they are all php scripts. > > These files are PHP scripts.
This is not a php script:
https://savannah.nongnu.org/js/show-hide.php:
document.write('<span class="show-hide" id="linkhide"><span class="minusorplus">(-)</span></span><span class="show-hide" id="linkshow"><span class="minusorplus">(+)</span></span>'); document.getElementById('linkshow').style.display = 'inline'; document.getElementById('linkhide').style.display = 'none'; document.getElementById('linkhide').onclick = function () { document.getElementById('content').style.display='none'; document.getElementById('linkhide').style.display='none'; document.getElementById('linkshow').style.display='inline'; } document.getElementById('linkshow').onclick = function () { document.getElementById('content').style.display='inline'; document.getElementById('linkshow').style.display='none'; document.getElementById('linkhide').style.display='inline'; }
neither is this:
https://savannah.nongnu.org/js/hide-span.php:
document.getElementById('').style.display='none';
> I'm pretty sure computer programs are copyrightable,
Some programs are copyrightable, other programs are not.
> otherwise there wouldn't be a free software movement.
Wrong. Copyright is just one tool that the bad guys use to make software proprietary.
I feel we are deviating too far from the practical issue. I don't think we have good chances to solve it.
> One might want to work on savannah, and write a script performing certain actions on all php files assuming they are all php scripts.
These files are PHP scripts.
> I mean that copyright, as the legal system, doesn't apply to them.
I'm pretty sure computer programs are copyrightable, otherwise there wouldn't be a free software movement.
> Why is it bad?
Because it confuses humans, including developers, users and sysadmins. One might want to work on savannah, and write a script performing certain actions on all php files assuming they are all php scripts. Filenames including extensions have meanings. Why not name them kittens.jpg and wannacry.exe?
> What do you mean that they are not copyrightable?
I mean that copyright, as the legal system, doesn't apply to them.
> It's just plain bad practice to include a .php file in <script>, with only js code in it.
Why is it bad?
> Yes. most of these scripts (probably all) are clearly uncopyrightable. applying licenses to uncopyrightable works is pointless.
What do you mean that they are not copyrightable? Are you saying most of these scripts don't have a license? If so then we have a bigger problem: the GNU project is hosting projects on a nonfree program.
> if the criteria LibreJS uses say that such scripts should be blocked because they have no licenses, then the criteria should be reconsidered.
"No license" means nonfree[1]. LibreJS's purpose is blocking nonfree nontrivial js, so blocking scripts without licensing is working as intended.
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#NoLicense
> and things like extension shouldn't confuse it---after all, they don't confuse the browser, do they?
LibreJS is not confused by the php extension - it blocks it as it is annotated as scripts. It's just plain bad practice to include a .php file in <script>, with only js code in it.
Yes. most of these scripts (probably all) are clearly uncopyrightable. applying licenses to uncopyrightable works is pointless. if the criteria LibreJS uses say that such scripts should be blocked because they have no licenses, then the criteria should be reconsidered.
> Update of sr #110659 (project administration): > > Status: In Progress => Need Info > Open/Closed: Open => Closed
I'm confused - what info is needed? An answer to your rhetoric question?
I thought these files should be "trivial" in terms of LibreJS; and things like extension shouldn't confuse it---after all, they don't confuse the browser, do they?
Savannah appears to be LibreJS-non compliant, with the following funnily named js programs not properly labelled:
https://savannah.nongnu.org/js/show-hide.php https://savannah.nongnu.org/js/hide-span.php
I guess the first step is to rename them to .js, before making them LibreJS compliant.
---
Example: on <https://savannah.nongnu.org/support/?110615> librejs complains:
blocked scripts in https://savannah.nongnu.org/support/?110615:
External script with no known license https://savannah.nongnu.org/js/hide-span.php:
External script with no known license
(Note: upload size limit is set to 16384 kB, after insertion of the required escape characters.)
Attach Files: Comment:
No files currently attached
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Only logged-in users can vote.
Please enter the title of George Orwell's famous dystopian book (it's a date):
Follow 6 latest changes.
Copyright © 2022 Free Software Foundation, Inc. Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium, provided this notice is preserved. The Levitating, Meditating, Flute-playing Gnu logo is a GNU GPL'ed image provided by the Nevrax Design Team. Source Code
Powered by Savane 3.9