1 |
Hi Brett, |
2 |
|
3 |
Brett I. Holcomb wrote: [Thu Nov 20 2003, 09:34:36PM EST] |
4 |
> Gentoo is a distro that allows us to get work done and not get into |
5 |
> the "if you use non-free software you have betrayed humanity" |
6 |
> argument. ... The person raising the question is a zealot who will |
7 |
> accept nothing less then all free software and no non-free. That was |
8 |
> explained many times and he, like all of us have a choice - use a |
9 |
> distro that fits whatever philosophy you have. |
10 |
|
11 |
Unfortunately you have missed the point of Gentoo. The point of Gentoo |
12 |
is to give choice to the users. The concept of Gentoo as a |
13 |
metadistribution is that Gentoo can be whatever distribution you want it |
14 |
to be. Granted, there are bounds since we're not going to implement |
15 |
Gentoo with rpms, but nonetheless, *this* is the point of Gentoo: Let |
16 |
the user decide. See http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/philosophy.xml |
17 |
|
18 |
In this case, what this means is that we need to implement |
19 |
ACCEPT_LICENSES in a clean, unobtrusive way with reasonable defaults so |
20 |
that (1) it doesn't get in your way, (2) the free software zealot can |
21 |
run Gentoo with pride. |
22 |
|
23 |
As Jason mentioned, putting reasonable defaults into make.defaults |
24 |
accomplishes #1. The default might even be ACCEPT_LICENSES='*', in |
25 |
which case modification in make.conf would need to be something like |
26 |
ACCEPT_LICENSES='-* GPL-1 GPL-2' (which then accomplishes #2) |
27 |
|
28 |
I'm all in favor of this change. So far we've been accumulating |
29 |
licenses in /usr/portage/licenses without a final goal for that |
30 |
directory. This change would finally make use of that directory and |
31 |
supply something that some of our users want, without making a headache |
32 |
for the rest of us. |
33 |
|
34 |
Aron |
35 |
|
36 |
-- |
37 |
Aron Griffis |
38 |
Gentoo Linux Developer (alpha / ia64 / ruby / vim) |
39 |
Key fingerprint = E3B6 8734 C2D6 B5E5 AE76 FB3A 26B1 C5E3 2010 4EB0 |