Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: new global USE flag "srcdist"

[Rick \\\"Zero_Chaos\\\" Farina]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/01/2014 08:51 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 01/01/2014 05:28 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> Hi,
>> According to GLEP 23 [1], the LICENSE variable regulates the software
>> that is installed on a system. There is however some ambiguity in
>> this: should it cover the actual files installed on the system, or
>> everything that is included in the package's tarball? This question
>> was asked several times in the past and arose in bug 492424 [2] again.
>
> Why do I as a user care about the license of a package? I want packages
> to be in @FREE in case I need to modify (and redistribute) them. But I
> only need to modify the parts that I use.
>
> If an otherwise-GPL package pulls in the latest Justin Bieber CD with
> USE=badtaste, that's not really an issue for me, because I'm not using
> it. I'm happy to install the rest of the package with the USE flag
> unset. The CD might as well be a separate package with a different
> license as far as I'm concerned.
>
> In essence, I don't want to *use* code that isn't @FREE. This includes
> the installed files, of course, but also the build system (that I use
> temporarily). We could generalize this to "any file accessed during
> emerge" to be on the safe side. That ensures that if I need to modify
> (and redistribute) any part of the software that I use, I can.
>
> What use case is there for having the LICENSE apply to anything else?

Some of us do redistribute the entire source package, so it does matter.
 If it doesn't matter to you as a user then you can always leave it
unset and you remain completely oblivious to the change.

- -Zero

>
>
>> I've always preferred the first interpretation, because the second one
>> would inevitably require us to repack many tarballs, in order to keep
>> their license in @FREE. This would for example include the Linux
>> kernel, where we could no longer use deblobbing, but would have to
>> provide our own tarball with firmware blobs removed. Not sure if users
>> would be happy if we wouldn't install from pristine sources any more.
>> We also have mirror and fetch restrictions which allow us to control
>> what tarballs we distribute, independent of the LICENSE variable.
>
> I think a better solution here, since these files are *installed*, is to
> introduce a new local flag (e.g. unfreeblobs) for the kernel that would
> append to LICENSE by the mechanism described below.
>
>
>> Nevertheless, I also see the point for covering the distfiles
>> contents.
>>
>> Within existing EAPIs we have only one LICENSE variable available.
>> (Extending it would be possible in future EAPIs, but we would end up
>> with a very long transition period.) USE conditional syntax is allowed
>> in LICENSE, though. So I wonder if this couldn't be used for the
>> intended purpose. For example, for specifying licenses of distfiles:
>>
>> 	LICENSE="<licenses of installed stuff>
>> 		srcdist? ( <licenses of unused stuff in distfiles> )"
>>
>> This idea was discussed within the licenses team, and the overall
>> reaction was positive.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Ulrich
>>
>> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0023.html
>> [2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=492424#c3
>>
>
>
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSxMtZAAoJEKXdFCfdEflK4uIP/RAl9JWej7SInRWRkMRFTiWe
SAGcvNUm7qbVKCPYWDKp82+3fN6wEXSWLRcB2nCS8jZy8adzEOF0Oqvym17J3sEI
wfiB3lI5VNCkx7lX0wJiYIbCmKVR6PgwTdeBGcDIzdgU2TPygXLADbBu7n+54f7U
XAWcKPQRcuAzBFxCzuL1yWQzBuovhTU9HMelPaYPkXUGvi+LWlfmDBXe2mG1gfD+
U8sNOyHjwuidR6slr9RjxFAkH5ItVzeRBMiE92kHurZpm06sVaqezj0Oj1PovgqS
ap/S/ncTQa7BrhmdzEIAqaLko/bpxJkjdWvEhj+MPQ453Et5+RvztE1h5KUdXrFj
QU/oKS2Pmh75cROlipSfN628cdBDYQ8x/eB8XIZDPKd4uc7i43tpYf8njbNNrLlG
jdioBnXEowJ+UQ/5vDM1s8ev3FToIfZRU1nFxREdJEYXx4qVhrZ/8yBlv7RWGcbs
IsCJEtbrUFAcNBMowQ6eN2SfWGrx8lpB+Qoh8WhsUR7XMuyBQYB0jCOOfeV8qDWd
kZn/t2+0daTxo70KRTLiVutHbqAaBjG1BF0iwZhS5YGmDufc2hm0fKgu7tzZb/HU
Q0jA9hgWLvAj4dqek7qp1j21af993tZadIR1gjU0WgY0HiEHFYmY1xqy8GF09ZgX
39Jvtx4tu9UEpgk0ERYA
=aSba
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----