On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 13:18 +0200, Torsten Veller wrote: > Why do we add a license to the licenses/ dir? Because there should be an easy way to find licenses? And you can do "emerge search foo", then read the license and decide wether you want to install foo.
> And in addition: When should a license be added to licenses/ ? When at least one ebuild uses a license that is not already there? > Do we only add those licenses to define valid names for the LICENSE > variable? AFAIK the license variable is not really used (someone correct me if I'm mistakne, please) > There are over 3MB in nearly 500 files. How will those licenses be > classified if ACCEPT_LICENSES (GLEP 23) is implemented? I guess groups ... OSI approved, "free", commercial, ... > Does the language of the license matter? (selfhtml is in german) I think licenses in English are preferred, but if it's only licensed with a german license ... > Aren't MIT and MetaKit and ... the same license? > Aren't X11 and cdegood and JamesClark and ... the same license? Maybe there's one paragraph changed - I haven't looked at them yet. > Should the licenses/ dir be cleaned? If by cleaned you mean unused licenses removed yes. If by cleaned you mean "reduced to the bare minimum" I'd say no. > (Should placeholders be used as in MIT?) > > What about all these /usr/share/doc/*/COPYING* files? Are they > necessary if all licenses are in licenses/ ? See first point. You want to read the license _before_ installing stuff > (Am i asking too many questions? No ;-) > Sorry, but i have the feeling that > this whole license stuff is not useful atm and i don't see how we > can deal with the great number of files in the future.) I haven't seen this as a problem - it has worked quite well up to now. Your concerns are valid, but as long as nobosy offers an alternative for managing licenses, I wouldn't change our policy - doesn't seem broken to me. Patrick -- Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
