On Tue, 4 May 2021, Quentin Schulz wrote:

> On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 06:00:10AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Tue, 4 May 2021, Quentin Schulz wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Robert,
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 08:41:25AM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > >
> > > >   for the first time, i'm digging around in the docs for how to
> > > > properly license various types of recipes, so a couple simple
> > > > questions to start with, at least so i can make a first pass of
> > > > cleaning up some content in front of me.
> > > >
> > > >   as we established recently, packagegroup files need no
> > > > licensing, the obvious observation being that they represent the
> > > > collection of licenses that comprise them. however, i notice that
> > > > the packagegroup.bbclass file does indeed define a default
> > > > license:
> > > >
> > > >   LICENSE ?= "MIT"
> > > >
> > > > so not only does a packagegroup have a default (MIT) license, but
> > > > it's conditional suggesting one could give it a different license.
> > > > what other licenses would make sense for a packagegroup? I'm
> > > > sticking with the default that packagegroup recipe files need no
> > > > LICENSE assignment, but now i'm curious as to what other options
> > > > there are (or perhaps that that default assignment in
> > > > packagegroup.bbclass is obsolete).
> > >
> > > Wild guess: all packages need a license. MIT is quite permissive so
> > > safe as a default?
> >
> >   superficially makes sense, except that a packagegroup does not
> > really define a "package". perhaps all *recipe* files need a license
>
> They do define packages. Empty packages, but still packages. Look into
> deploy/ipk and search for *packagegroup*, you'll see some.
>
> It's probably a requirement/feature of package managers, so that you
> install one package which has a dependency on many others, and the
> latter are just pulled in by the package manager directly.
>
> > but, again, it's not clear how a packagegroup license should percolate
> > down to the packages it contains. or how things would percolate up.
> >
>
> It does not apply to packages it RDEPENDS on, it applies to the packages
> created by the packagegroup recipe, each of them then RDEPENDS on other
> packages (with potentially (and often) licensed differently).

  ah, now it makes sense, thanks.

rday
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#53358): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/53358
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/82402742/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to