On 5/19/06, Hisham Muhammad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/19/06, Jonas Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2006/5/19, Carlo Calica <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > 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.
Or perhaps doc/foobar-1.0/COPYING, to be compatible with and add no
extra packager work for most packages out there? (sure, Compile could
look for COPYING and copy/symlink it to Resources/LicenseAgreement,
too.)
R/LicenseAgreement is only for licenses that need a click-thru. I've
flip flopped on storing license metadata. I now think it is a good
idea. The file is R/License. The first line contains the license
name, BSD, GPL, LGPL. The 2+ lines are the actual license. Creating
that file is the due deligence the recipe author does to ensure the
software is redistributable. Without it we can't make packages.
--
Carlo J. Calica
_______________________________________________
gobolinux-devel mailing list
gobolinux-devel@lists.gobolinux.org
http://lists.gobolinux.org/mailman/listinfo/gobolinux-devel
