On 12/15/2009 01:46 AM, Daniel Black wrote:
I did email the debian maintainer too. no response yet. They have interactive builds though and I guess we do too now. Will be a royal pain if every CA/software did the same thing.
The last thing gentoo needs is interactive builds. XFree86 was forked over something less annoying than that (advertising clause)...
I'd rather put a disclaimer in the handbook that when you install gentoo you bear the consequences of anything you do with it: if you're in a jurisdiction where software licenses are binding on those who use software then be sure to set ACCEPT_LICENSE accordingly, and all users should monitor the outputs of their builds for important notices.
On that note, perhaps the default make.conf should send ELOGs to r...@localhost or something? People can disable it if they don't like it, but I don't think we want our default to be that important notices are lost.
If legal experts feel that the only thing that will work would be an interactive build, then we should:
1. Have the build by default terminate with an error that it requires some kind of acknowledgment. Ideally have the package manager detect this condition at --pretend time. 2. Have the user set this acknowledgment using an environment variable in make.conf (perhaps a setting for these purposes), or a local use flag, or some other one-time non-interactive mechanism. 3. Have the build notice this and proceed normally (so the actual build and future upgrades are non-interactive).
4. Ensure that this package is NOT required by anything in system, or installed by default by any major popular package (so maybe we have ca-certificates, and ca-certificates-annoying or something).
We definitely don't want the gentoo experience to be one of typing emerge world and then having to check back on it every three minutes to see what the latest prompt is.
I'm generally in favor of including CACert by default, but if they're going to shoot themselves in the foot over licensing then that is their loss. I already have to install it manually for chromium (a real pita, btw). I can't see the council voting to allow interactive builds for a certificate, and I really don't see why CACert is pushing this either...
