Archives
Archives
| From: | Carsten Lohrke <carlo@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Eigen and GPL-2 exception - is a new licence required? | ||
| Date: | Sat, 12 May 2007 12:30:45 | ||
| Message-Id: | 200705121427.50624.carlo@gentoo.org | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-dev] Eigen and GPL-2 exception - is a new licence required? by "Marcus D. Hanwell" |
||
| 1 | No. LICENSE="GPL-2 some-exception" suffices. That said, we suck at our |
| 2 | licensing information badly. E.g. every single ebuild linking against OpenSSL |
| 3 | has (or at least needs to have) a linking exeption. We don't flag this |
| 4 | anywhere. More important, what's with optional dependencies!? We don't |
| 5 | support |
| 6 | |
| 7 | LICENSE="GPL-2 ssl? ( openssl-exception)" |
| 8 | |
| 9 | style LICENSE content at all iirc. Similar for all the patent-encumbered |
| 10 | multimedia libs, which can't be distributed as binaries, but are not blocked |
| 11 | by some bindist feature flag or so. |
| 12 | |
| 13 | |
| 14 | Carsten |
| File name | MIME type |
|---|---|
| signature.asc | application/pgp-signature |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Eigen and GPL-2 exception - is a new licence required? | Carsten Lohrke <carlo@g.o> |
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Eigen and GPL-2 exception - is a new licence required? | "Bryan Østergaard" <kloeri@g.o> |
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Eigen and GPL-2 exception - is a new licence required? | "Harald van Dijk" <truedfx@g.o> |
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Eigen and GPL-2 exception - is a new licence required? | Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> |