| 1 |
Yuri Vasilevski a écrit : |
| 2 |
> so, my point is that licences are very important in some environments |
| 3 |
> and to some people, and having an inconsistently can cause serious |
| 4 |
> legal problems to users. So it is very important to keep them in sync |
| 5 |
> in all tree of upstream, portage tree and vdb tree. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
And people who are really worried about licensing issues should not even |
| 8 |
*look* at the LICENSE data which can be seriously out-of-date/wrong if |
| 9 |
maintainers are not careful enough. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Furthermore, for a lot of packages, only the "major" license is |
| 12 |
described in the ebuild, leaving the "minor" licenses out : |
| 13 |
- main software is GPL |
| 14 |
- library is LGPL |
| 15 |
- images/icons are CC-SA |
| 16 |
- doc/man are GFDL, ... |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
As for the original question: I don't think a license change warrants a |
| 19 |
rebuild for end users. It's just a waste of bandwidth and CPU cycles. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Cheers :) |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Rémi Cardona |
| 25 |
LRI, INRIA |
| 26 |
remi.cardona@×××.fr |
| 27 |
remi@g.o |
Archives