| 1 |
On 12/15/2009 01:46 AM, Daniel Black wrote: |
| 2 |
> I did email the debian maintainer too. no response yet. They have interactive |
| 3 |
> builds though and I guess we do too now. Will be a royal pain if every |
| 4 |
> CA/software did the same thing. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
The last thing gentoo needs is interactive builds. XFree86 was forked |
| 8 |
over something less annoying than that (advertising clause)... |
| 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 |
|
| 16 |
On that note, perhaps the default make.conf should send ELOGs to |
| 17 |
root@localhost or something? People can disable it if they don't like |
| 18 |
it, but I don't think we want our default to be that important notices |
| 19 |
are lost. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
If legal experts feel that the only thing that will work would be an |
| 22 |
interactive build, then we should: |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
1. Have the build by default terminate with an error that it requires |
| 25 |
some kind of acknowledgment. Ideally have the package manager detect |
| 26 |
this condition at --pretend time. |
| 27 |
2. Have the user set this acknowledgment using an environment variable |
| 28 |
in make.conf (perhaps a setting for these purposes), or a local use |
| 29 |
flag, or some other one-time non-interactive mechanism. |
| 30 |
3. Have the build notice this and proceed normally (so the actual build |
| 31 |
and future upgrades are non-interactive). |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
4. Ensure that this package is NOT required by anything in system, or |
| 34 |
installed by default by any major popular package (so maybe we have |
| 35 |
ca-certificates, and ca-certificates-annoying or something). |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
We definitely don't want the gentoo experience to be one of typing |
| 38 |
emerge world and then having to check back on it every three minutes to |
| 39 |
see what the latest prompt is. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
I'm generally in favor of including CACert by default, but if they're |
| 42 |
going to shoot themselves in the foot over licensing then that is their |
| 43 |
loss. I already have to install it manually for chromium (a real pita, |
| 44 |
btw). I can't see the council voting to allow interactive builds for a |
| 45 |
certificate, and I really don't see why CACert is pushing this either... |
Archives