| 1 |
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005 09:51:16 -0400 |
| 2 |
Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Basically, we just add "commercial" to LICENSE in the ebuild, and (if |
| 5 |
> wanted or necessary) add "check_license |
| 6 |
> $licese_required_to_be_accepted" to pkg_setup on the ebuild. While |
| 7 |
> this will break completely interactive ebuilds until GLEP23 is fully |
| 8 |
> implemented, a user can add the license to make.conf in an |
| 9 |
> ACCEPT_LICENSE variable, to keep portage from asking again. This |
| 10 |
> means when a user does an "emerge -S" they will see the nice little |
| 11 |
> "commercial" listed under licenses, which will hopefully trigger to |
| 12 |
> them that this package is not free. Another possible addition is a |
| 13 |
> "commercial-free" license, which would cover things like America's |
| 14 |
> Army and Enemy Territory (I'm sure there are others, but I know of |
| 15 |
> these two) that are free for users to use, but are still commercial |
| 16 |
> software. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Can't say that I exactly like this, mainly because "commercial" |
| 19 |
wouldn't be a real license and so kinda blurs the meaning of LICENSE. |
| 20 |
But then one could say the same about "as-is". My other concern is that |
| 21 |
there is no clear criteria for commercial packages, e.g. are sun-jdk / |
| 22 |
other fetch restricted packages commercial? |
| 23 |
That said, it's probably the best approach that doesn't require portage |
| 24 |
changes. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Marius |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be |
| 32 |
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. |
Archives