Christian Faulhammer wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Is this something worth pinching for a future EAPI? If we go with the >> postfix [] form for ranged deps, it'd translate into: >> LICENSE="=GPL-2" (or equivalently, LICENSE="GPL[=2]") >> LICENSE="|| ( GPL[>=2] BSD )" (or equivalently, ">=GPL-2") >> LICENSE="|| ( LGPL[>=2&<3] Eclipse )" > > This is hardly readable, in my eyes at least but I am older than 25 > now. I think it is not really necessary (overkill), but I haven't > heard anything from other people yet. > >> 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. > Could this not simplify to <license><version-spec> where version spec is either a simple -ver prefix as with GPL-2 (meaning only GPL-2) or a postfix range specifier? IOW allow the existing usage since its meaning is clear and it's easy to parse.
I'd also be in favour of an implicit = so that GPL[>2] would cover the most common usage. After all, in the realm of licensing it makes no sense to have eg GPL[>3] mean anything after, but not including 3, since the new version must be specified before usage for it to mean anything legally. (Otherwise how is a user to know the terms of the license being referred to?) Overall though I like it; GPL[2|3] (from other post) vs '|| ( GPL-2 GPL-3 )' sounds nice as well. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list