Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] changing the default of ACCEPT_LICENSE in portage
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:18:14
Message-Id: CAGfcS_=aS3tGya+m=rDY6SPgpkRLhs5bYh=K-Ov+LSwHO1tw7w@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] changing the default of ACCEPT_LICENSE in portage by hasufell
1 On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:50 AM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote:
2 > On 07/31/2013 01:46 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
3 >>
4 >> We're not Debian, and that is a good thing™.
5 >>
6 >
7 > You miss the point. This thread is not about banning ebuilds which let
8 > you install unfree software.
9 >
10
11 You're thinking of gNewSense, or one of the 47 distros on the FSF
12 webpage that nobody has heard about. :)
13
14 I won't throw in my own two sense. Personally, I'm on the fence here.
15 I think this is a matter of values and largely boils down to ESR vs
16 RMS to some extent. I would say that those who want to make a change
17 probably have the burden of justifying the change. You don't need to
18 explain your rationale - you've already done a great job with that. I
19 think the bigger hurdle is whether the community buys in, though this
20 will only impact new users.
21
22 If there were some easy way to take a poll it might be interesting to
23 see the results. Dare I suggest a forum post?
24
25 To be constructive, I think I'll try building a desktop in a VM and
26 just see what the day-to-day impact of your proposal actually is.
27 Nvidia drivers really only come to mind as the biggest stumbling block
28 for most - the days of proprietary codecs and such are mostly behind
29 us I think. Those who oppose the change might point out specific
30 "killer apps" that this gets in the way of.
31
32 Rich

Replies