| 1 |
On Tuesday 15 December 2009 23:19:22 Richard Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 12/15/2009 01:46 AM, Daniel Black wrote: |
| 3 |
> > I did email the debian maintainer too. no response yet. They have |
| 4 |
> > interactive builds though and I guess we do too now. Will be a royal pain |
| 5 |
> > if every CA/software did the same thing. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> The last thing gentoo needs is interactive builds. |
| 8 |
agree. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> I'd rather put a disclaimer in the handbook that when you install gentoo |
| 11 |
> you bear the consequences of anything you do with it: if you're in a |
| 12 |
> jurisdiction where software licenses are binding on those who use |
| 13 |
> software then be sure to set ACCEPT_LICENSE accordingly, and all users |
| 14 |
> should monitor the outputs of their builds for important notices. |
| 15 |
sounds reasonable. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> If legal experts feel that the only thing that will work would be an |
| 18 |
> interactive build, then we should: |
| 19 |
I'm not sure it is. Its very early days of this license. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
after reading this license without (or significantly less of) a headache i'm |
| 22 |
thinking 1.4 2) "to advice the end-user of the NRP-DaL" refers to advising the |
| 23 |
user that the license exists rather the text of it. Gentoo maintainers could |
| 24 |
simple add the NRP-DaL to the LICENSE of the ebuild. Portage 2.2's requiring |
| 25 |
the user add acceptable licenses to ACCEPT_LICENSE is probably sufficient. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> I'm generally in favor of including CACert by default, but if they're |
| 28 |
> going to shoot themselves in the foot over licensing then that is their |
| 29 |
> loss. |
| 30 |
they aren't trying to they just don't know our issues. I did ask for wider |
| 31 |
consultation and to be wary of clauses incompatible with distributors normal |
| 32 |
operations. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> .. and I really don't see why CACert is pushing this either... |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Clearing up a legal loop to allow distribution in a way that communicates the |
| 37 |
NRP-DaL to the end-user. Their own page http://www.cacert.org/index.php?id=3 |
| 38 |
doesn't mention NRP-DaL either so as you can see, their are just progressing |
| 39 |
with a few little bumps and inconsistencies like everyone else. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
https://lists.cacert.org/wws/arc/cacert-board/2009-12/msg00080.html |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Daniel |
Archives