| 1 |
>>>>> On Fri, 30 Mar 2012, Richard Yao wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>> what do you mean by 'relicense' ? for ebuilds, you'll have to ask |
| 4 |
>> permission to all contributors to this area, and, afaik, the |
| 5 |
>> foundation owns copyrights so it has a word to say too. |
| 6 |
>> if you mean the 'LICENSE' field of ebuilds, then this is not the |
| 7 |
>> right place to ask. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> I am referring to the ebuilds themselves. Right now, all ebuilds in |
| 10 |
> the tree are GPL-2 licensed. This makes contributing FreeBSD-specific |
| 11 |
> improvements to FreeBSD Ports upstream difficult. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> I want sys-freebsd/virtio-kmod to be BSD-2 licensed, but I do not |
| 14 |
> expect the version that enters the portage tree to be BSD-2 licensed |
| 15 |
> unless people clarify that it is okay to license ebuilds under |
| 16 |
> something other than the GPL-2. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I fail to understand what the license of the ebuild has to do with the |
| 19 |
license of the package itself. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Ebuilds in the Portage tree must be licensed under the GPL. This is |
| 22 |
part of the Gentoo Social Contract [1], so I guess it won't change |
| 23 |
anytime soon. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
And IMHO, we would be ill-advised to allow different licenses for |
| 26 |
ebuilds in the tree, because that would imply that we cannot copy code |
| 27 |
from one ebuild to another (or from ebuild to eclass) any more. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Ulrich |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
[1] <http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml> |
Archives