* Philip Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-09-08 18:22]: > Stephen Hahn wrote: > > The GUI is, by definition, interactive. The license action needs to > > have an attribute that the GUI will interpret as "present an accept > > dialogue". The CLI will ignore this attribute. > > In other words, rendering the entire vendor licensing concept of, "If I > package my software in IPS, I will be able to ensure installation, ONLY if > the user accepts my license", invalid. > > If you're not going to require it in all cases, then you may as well just > not implement it in the first place. To do otherwise, is just a fancy > technical way of lying to vendors.
At this time, there is no plan to make the packaging CLI interactive. I'm happy to go down a path where a package that presents a license requiring acceptance to cause pkg(1) invocation to fail. I've not had legal guidance that suggests that is required; software practice around install-time versus execution-time license acceptance is not universal; moreover, it is possible to require license acceptance prior to retrieval via access control on the repository. - Stephen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.sun.com/sch/ _______________________________________________ pkg-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss
