Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:06:46 +0100 > > Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > One thing that would need to be decided: > > > > > > LICENSE="GPL-2" > > > > > > Would that require an = prefix? To simplify things, we could say > > > that *only* the postfix [] form counts for licenses... > > > > To have backwards compatability...yes. > > Backwards compatibility isn't necessary over an EAPI bump. The question > is whether it's sufficiently useful that having inconsistent parsing > rules for dep specs and license specs is acceptable.
perhaps its really a matter of how often this would be used. for a span of three license versions, i'd prefer unranged notation as it's more easily read (opfer's argument). /usr/portage/licenses seems to carry but a handfull of licenses with more than three version numbers. ranged version numbers OTOH are used much more often... there is also the legal argument. it's better to state explicitly which versions apply and not have to cleanup the mess, when somebody decides to release GPL-2.5. kind regards Thilo
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
