Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship

Installation:
Gentoo Handbook
Installation Docs

Documentation:
Home
Listing
About Gentoo
Philosophy
Social Contract

Resources:
Bug Tracker
Developer List
Discussion Forums
Gentoo BitTorrents
Gentoo Linux Enhancement Proposals
IRC Channels
Mailing Lists
Mirrors
Name and Logo Guidelines
Online Package Database
Security Announcements
Staffing Needs
Supporting Vendors
View our CVS

Graphics:
Logos and themes
Icons
ScreenShots

Miscellaneous Resources:
Gentoo Linux Store
Gentoo-hosted projects
IBM dW/Intel article archive




List Archive: gentoo-project
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-project: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: "Marijn Schouten (hkBst)" <hkBst@g.o>
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke-jr@...>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] "Gentoo is and will remain Free Software"
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:41:02 -0500
On Thursday 12 March 2009 06:53:21 am Marijn Schouten (hkBst) wrote:
> Luke-Jr wrote:
> > I have been reporting bugs over the past few months regarding licensing
> > issues, and inappropriate dependencies on non-Free software. Someone
> > recommended I begin a thread on -dev, however, seeing as it may be of
> > greater concern in regard to Gentoo's Social Contract.
>
> How have these bugs been handled?

It can vary. Some of the more trivial things (incorrect LICENSE values) seem 
to be ignored more often than fixed. gsm/sox I believe ended up with 
RESTRICT=mirror in a timely fashon (they are not legally redistributable). The 
KDE team seemed interested in fixing up the font issue, though there was a 
little original hesistation along the lines of whether Gentoo cared if a font 
was not free to sell. The poppler issue seems to be waiting for input/action 
on the printing hurd since March 8th (4 days ago).

> > To help mitigate this problem, I propose completion of GLEP 23's
> > implementation; we already have a working ACCEPT_LICENSE, but the
> > "minimum" groups (in particular, @OSI-APPROVED) are as of yet still not
> > defined. By enabling more users to filter by approved licenses, I feel
> > these issues will get more attention.
>
> I don't know how this has been implemented. I believe they are just lists,
> but I am not sure where. We should probably have some file such that for
> each license we can specify whether or not it is a member of some group.

GLEP 23 defines this as a file profiles/license_groups with one line per 
group, formatted: <groupname> <license1> <license2> ... <licenseN>

> With lists it isn't clear whether a license does not belong to a group or
> hasn't been considered. Unless we introduce the complement groups
> explicitly. For each group OSI we also have the group !OSI. That way the
> infos would be there, even though they would still need to be extracted by
> some tool.

Since GLEP 23 already defines a format for this, and all those tiny files 
would use excess disk blocks, perhaps something like this should be considered 
as "source" material and "compiled" into the license_groups file by a simple 
shell script. :)



Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-project: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
New staffer: George Kadianakis (asn)
Next by thread:
Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))
Previous by date:
Re: New staffer: George Kadianakis (asn)
Next by date:
Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Donate to support our development efforts.

Gentoo Centric Hosting: vr.org

VR Hosted

Tek Alchemy

Tek Alchemy

SevenL.net

SevenL.net

php|architect

php|architect

Copyright 2001-2007 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Email www@gentoo.org.