1 |
First, thanks for pointing this out. |
2 |
|
3 |
On 01/20/2011 07:51 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: |
4 |
> License compliance when distributing binaries; |
5 |
|
6 |
Not sure what you mean: if someone quickpkg's php and needs all the |
7 |
source? Well, they already downloaded them. Better keep them around, |
8 |
since it's *your* binary, not mine. |
9 |
|
10 |
> distributions built upon Gentoo that might use old and set-in-stone |
11 |
> Portage trees; |
12 |
|
13 |
Same thing, as already pointed out in another message. I see the point |
14 |
in making it easier for them. That's okay. So what you're saying is |
15 |
we're upstream too and upstream's should provide their historical stuff. |
16 |
|
17 |
> security issues that might be reported and needs to be |
18 |
> investigated, ... |
19 |
|
20 |
If you're reporting a security issue in a ebuild that's no longer in |
21 |
tree (in php's case, chances are it got removed b/c of security :p), the |
22 |
bug wouldn't be investigated, right? |