On Sat, 2003-11-22 at 05:28, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > On Sat, Nov 22, 2003 at 01:06:05AM -0600, Matthew Kennedy wrote: > > Seriously though, it is my impression that you may be surprised how > > many folks care that their box uses free software only. You might > > want to check the Debian news out of late. There's a proposal to do > > away with(?) non-free in their distro (ie. clause 5. in their social > > contract would be removed). > > > > I suppose I am dismayed that we are failing to promote free software > > over proprietary software. > > It is not Gentoo's goal to become a free-software only distribution. It is > important that we, as metadistribution, give the users the choice to choose > for "free-software only" if they want. I'm sure we can all agree on this > ability to choose. > > So yes, to use your example, it is important that gamers don't quit Gentoo > because of a decision we force upon them, instead of having them decide > theirselves. > > Implementing an ACCEPT_LICENSES variable is a very important proposal. The > question is what we would use "per default". Do we only accept free (as in > speech) licenses per default, and have the user choose the others > individually, or accept free (as in beer) licenses per default, having the > user restrict/extend the amount of licenses he wishes? > > I can certainly agree if we go for the former (from a GNU/OSI perspective), > but also if the latter is chosen (from a userfriendly perspective).
I would also agree with either. If we went the OSI way, though, we should make it easy for the user to add licenses. I believe that logic would need to be added to portage to automatically extend ACCEPT_LICENSES for any licenses which were interactively accepted during an emerge. -- Chris Gianelloni Developer, Gentoo Linux Games Team Is your power animal a penguin?
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
