Add package for the 2027 driverstation

[me-it-is]

The 2027 driverstation supports both MacOS and linux.
On nixos it will need to have a module because it requires udev rules
Driverstation repo

[taciturnaxolotl]

already on it! we are discussing how to release the 2026 stuff in #69

[blaze-developer]

"These installers are not to be uploaded to any public package repositories without permission of FIRST or WPILib."

I am not sure the reason behind this disclaimer. However, I believe that since with frc-nix, we are not packaging installers, let alone uploading anything to any sort of package repository. We are only writing build scripts which pull directly from the source, meaning its alright for us to package.

[taciturnaxolotl]

oh interesting; I think we should probably be technically in the clear but it might not be a bad idea to ask

[blaze-developer]

Id assume its a support perspective, if people are getting a package from somewhere other than official sources, FIRST cant provide support for that specific distribution, as there are different technicalities than from official builds. However, I feel like that would be best suited as a "We wont support external package managers when you call for help" rather than "don't package this application without asking". I think were in the clear. Everybody using this repository should be aware that we will not get official support. But I guess we can also ask 🤷

Or, in the case that it really is based on binaries being uploaded and downloaded from other sources, the concern could be malware / backdoors. In which case we are still in the clear, as we aren't distributing any binaries.

just working through the logic here, so I could be very wrong and it can just be because they wanted control over their software haha.

[nullcubee]

On nixos it will need to have a module because it requires udev rules

I mean, you can put udev rules into the package, and then tell people to add it to services.udev.packages also, but having a module just for conveniences sake would also be nice. Other potential issue is claiming to need add the app(!?) to the input group, but the way they explain how to do it (chgrp and chmod) ...doesn't make any sense to me? Like I don't think that's how that works?

"These installers are not to be uploaded to any public package repositories without permission of FIRST or WPILib."

This is slightly concerning, and seems to want to discourage exactly what we are doing for some reason? However:

We are only writing build scripts which pull directly from the source

This is correct, and as such I think we'd be fine if anybody got mad at us. There is precedent for unfree software in nixpkgs, and since frc-nix doesn't have a binary cache anyways I don't think there's anything to worry about. This is part of what the meta.license field is used for in nixpkgs, and the difference between lib.licenses.unfree and lib.licenses.unfreeRedistributable.

Everybody using this repository should be aware that we will not get official support.

One would hope, could be worth adding a disclaimer on the readme also.

it can just be because they wanted control over their software haha.

I mean, that is technically their right as it's not distributed under an open source license lol.

[nullcubee]

https://wpilib.org/blog/the-2027-first-driver-station

Linux Desktop and macOS will not be getting FMS support.

I assume this means that you will not actually be able to use Linux at competition, which is sad but understandable. Still useful for practice and offseason though.

[nullcubee]

Oh! I just looked at the archive and they do actually include a license, (not an open source one) and it has some interesting clauses?

[taciturnaxolotl]

oh fun

[taciturnaxolotl]

Id assume its a support perspective, if people are getting a package from somewhere other than official sources, FIRST cant provide support for that specific distribution, as there are different technicalities than from official builds.

https://www.chiefdelphi.com/t/wpilib-blog-the-2027-first-driver-station/519275/132 that was pretty much confirmed on chief

[taciturnaxolotl]

Limited Distribution. You may not distribute the Software or otherwise make the Software available for use by others. As an exception to this, you may distribute the Software in an offline capacity to other users at FIRST® Events.

now this just seems ridiculous

full text of the license here did:plc:krxbvxvis5skq7jj6eot23ul/3mkdc2qj6s622

[taciturnaxolotl]

Well, they seem unlikely to change it; my opinion is that the way the text reads now, we are "distributing" copies of the software, but rather installation scripts, which aren't covered.

edit: seems like that is the interpretation on chief as well

[blaze-developer]

All the people on chief are acting like children 😞 It feels like an anticonstructive political debate.

[taciturnaxolotl]

honestly yeah; i know i'm not helping

[nullcubee]

All the people on chief are acting like children 😞 It feels like an anticonstructive political debate.

yeah, I'm worried that the devs are gonna get the wrong impression when like I (and most people I suspect/hope) are actually quite happy and understanding of the cross-platform support situation.

[taciturnaxolotl]

definetly agree; complaints tend to be far louder than thanks