Zac Medico wrote:
> Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>> I propose support for license groups in ebuilds then, I guess.
> That seems like a reasonable solution. So, an ebuild can do
> something like LICENSE="@GPL-2+" and that will expand to whatever
> the definition of the GPL-2+ license group happens to be. When a new
> version of GPL license comes out, we simple add it to that group,
> and none of the corresponding ebuilds have to be updated.
I suppose adding group license support in ebuilds will fix the problem
too. But I see a few disadvantages like:
- new behavior for @ operator: it will not only expand a group but also
adding a || operator (only for LICENSE)
- devs will have to maintain new groups
- group support in LICENSE has no other need that managing versioned
In an other hand, it will prevent us adding a new operator.
And Sébastian, I don't understand you when you said GPL-2+ will be
confusing for the user as it's a term commonly used in the FOSS world.
But if everybody think groups are better, that will be fine.

For those who think this feature is useless because we are not lawyers
and ebuilds don't care about licenses, I just want to add it will not be
a new _requirement_ but a new _possibility_. As Ciaran's said, you
already have to check for licenses at the moment. So even if some devs
do mistake (or do not update the info) as said Jeremy, we have at least
this information. If you know a package is GPL-2 licensed, you can set
LICENSE="GPL-2", it's valid, IMO. If you want to go far than that and
check if it's GPL-2+, it's better but not _needed_.
It's a small feature and it can help.


Reply via email to