Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] LICENSE and revbumps
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 02:18:07
1 I have an interesting (to me anyways) question.
3 Should LICENSE changes require a revision bump?
5 It kinda seems to me the answer should be yes. I don't know if any PM
6 currently implements LICENSE filtering so there may not be any
7 technical reason for it yet. And so I guess it comes down to a
8 philosophical question - what determines the licence(s) a currently
9 installed package is covered by? My thought is that this would be the
10 value in /var/db/pkg/${P}/LICENSE, being the LICENSE value at install
11 time, and therefore a change in the tree requires reinstallation to
12 change that value.
14 On the other hand, it also seems completely ridiculous from a practical
15 POV to have to wait 30 days (and waste arch team resources) to fix an
16 incorrect licence on a stable package.
18 Thoughts?
21 --
22 gcc-porting, by design, by neglect
23 treecleaner, for a fact or just for effect
24 wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] LICENSE and revbumps Yuri Vasilevski <yvasilev@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] LICENSE and revbumps Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] LICENSE and revbumps Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] LICENSE and revbumps Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o>