Zac Medico posted on Fri, 04 Sep 2009 18:06:09 -0700 as excerpted:
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,
Nikos Chantziaras posted on Sat, 05 Sep 2009 02:19:12 +0300 as excerpted:
On 09/05/2009 01:24 AM, Robert Bradbury wrote:
Is gnash still under development (as an open source alternative to
Adobe flash)?
TTBOMK [1], gnash is now a GNU sponsored project, one I believe they are
actually paying
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009, Zac Medico 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.
So
Le 05/09/2009 11:25, Duncan a écrit :
[...]
This is off-topic for gentoo-dev. Please continue this discussion in
private.
Thanks
Rémi
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009, Zac Medico 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
On Friday 04 of September 2009 22:08:02 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:04:46 +0200
Rémi Cardona r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Having tools to manipulate those variables is very misleading since
users will (rightfully) assume that we've done our homework and that
upstream did too.
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 16:03:25 +0200
Maciej Mrozowski reave...@poczta.fm wrote:
Why not use EAPI 4 to make sure people have done that homework then?
Because it won't make *upstream* do their homework.
If upstream won't tell you the licence under which something is
distributed, how does Gentoo
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
On Sat, 05 Sep 2009, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
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
Mounir Lamouri wrote:
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+
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
IMHO the main disadvantage is that ebuilds would have to be converted
to EAPI-4 for this,
Why do they _have_ to? I understand that it's optional and that we can
take time with it until a new license (e.g. GPL-4) arrives.
Also, scripts/tools can help with the transition.
On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 04:03:25PM +0200, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
On Friday 04 of September 2009 22:08:02 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:04:46 +0200
R?mi Cardona r...@gentoo.org wrote:
Having tools to manipulate those variables is very misleading since
users will
12 matches
Mail list logo
