2006/5/19, Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 5/18/06, Hisham Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 5/17/06, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 2006/5/17, Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > The only hatch, as I see it, is that one must present the license (or
> > > at least point to it) for the user, in any way possible, so that they
> > > are aware that they are using licensed software. This doesn't has to
> > > be a click-through approach, it is mandatory.
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
Sun wants an "agreement" to the license. That (to me) implies a
disagree option. So simply showing the license is not enough. A
yes/no click-through is needed.
This is not true. From the DLJ FAQ
(http://download.java.net/dlj/DLJ-FAQ-v1.1.txt):
9. What do you mean by "present end-user licenses"? Do I have to create a
click-through license display when a user first installs or runs
the JDK? Must my users accept the license?
Your users must agree to the license terms for ethe JDK before
installing it. While you aren't required to show the DLJ on first
use or installation, you must inform them that ethe JDK is licensed
software and that they must agree to the license before using it. A
click-through mechanism is the preferred way to do this, but at a
minimum you must present the license by some appropriate means for
acceptance. For example, your OS download procedure could show the
user a page that informs him or her that software packages included
in the download may contain software licenses to which the user must
agree before installation, and allow the user to review them before
download.
> > > Is this doable with any of GoboLinux' mechanisms?
>
> It's doable in pre_build in Recipes. Right now, binary packages only
> offer PostInstall; presenting the license after the files have been
> already put in place would be kinda weird. I think it would be best to
> extend InstallPackage as proposed below:
>
How about Resource/LicenseAgreement which contains the license. I
prefer this name because it reinforces the need to agree with it.
I think this is good. To have one name of the license agreement file
for InstallPackage to read. This means, of course, that the package
maintainer have to rename the license file.
--
/Jonas
_______________________________________________
gobolinux-devel mailing list
gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org
http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
