1 |
On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> Ebuilds in the Portage tree must be licensed under the GPL. This is |
3 |
> part of the Gentoo Social Contract [1], so I guess it won't change |
4 |
> anytime soon. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> And IMHO, we would be ill-advised to allow different licenses for |
7 |
> ebuilds in the tree, because that would imply that we cannot copy code |
8 |
> from one ebuild to another (or from ebuild to eclass) any more. |
9 |
> |
10 |
|
11 |
Speaking as an individual trustee, I tend to agree. |
12 |
|
13 |
If there are specific pains associated with not being able to submit |
14 |
patches upstream or such, please do point them out and I'm sure we'll |
15 |
consider what can be done to accommodate this. However, if this |
16 |
really is a one-off situation then we're probably better-off if we |
17 |
just ask individual contributors to re-license when needed. |
18 |
|
19 |
I'd think the only thing in the portage tree upstream would be |
20 |
interested in would be patches (including sed operations). |
21 |
|
22 |
Rich |