Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Cc: licenses <licenses@g.o>
Subject: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] @DISTFILE-REDISTRIBUTABLE license group
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 07:17:24
Message-Id: 289b815331e4d29c9cb5bb7e5613e30ab6016806.camel@gentoo.org
1 Hi,
2
3 We currently have @BINARY-REDISTRIBUTABLE license group that somewhat
4 concerns RESTRICT=bindist. I think it'd be reasonable to introduce
5 a matching group concerning RESTRICT=mirror.
6
7 My proposition would be to add @DISTFILE-REDISTRIBUTABLE group with
8 the following rules:
9
10 - MUST permit redistribution of unmodified distfiles
11
12 - MUST NOT require explicit approval (No items from @EULA)
13
14 - MAY prohibit redistributing modified distfiles
15
16 - MAY restrict the cost of redistribution
17
18
19 Rationale: the main idea is to aid checking for missing
20 RESTRICT="mirror". The rules are based on current bindist group but are
21 more relaxed given the specific use case of our mirrors. Most notably:
22
23 1. It permits licenses that prohibit redistributing modified distfiles.
24 In this case, due diligence is required from developers. If this is
25 prohibited, they may only add original upstream sources to SRC_URI.
26
27 2. It permits restrictions on cost of redistribution, as some upstreams
28 prohibit selling their products. While this renders them non-free, it
29 shouldn't be a problem for our mirrors since we don't expect to sell
30 stuff there ;-).
31
32 Note that while technically there could be a problem with selling, say,
33 Gentoo CDs with distfiles included, RESTRICT=mirror doesn't cover this
34 case anyway.
35
36
37 WDYT?
38
39 --
40 Best regards,
41 Michał Górny

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies