25.12.2005, 3:11:53, Bret Towe wrote:

> i can understand putting proper warning in the ebuild if the dev thinks
> that its worth the user really noting the issues surrounding it, not
> forcing their ideals onto the user if i wanted that i would run debian

Erm, we are not forcing our ideal on users, we simple refuse to commit an
ebuild for code which has no valid license.

For those unfamiliar with the whole thing (Bug 52882, Bug 94477 and tons of
dupes): Someone has forked a proprietary code with a sucky license,
relicensed it under fake LGPL for the sole purpose of being able to host the
project on SF, and even explicitely acknowledges that what he's doing is
illegal:

--- COPYING ------
Due to the license <License.htm>, so I can't make it public,
Last November, I decided to register mac-port at SourceForge,
so I had to choose an open source license, so I chosen LGPL
for this mac-port. It is close to the original license,
but doesn't get the permission from the original author, Matt.

This license would be changed when the author asks in the
future.
------------------

What the heck kind of license and behaviour is the above? And why should
Gentoo ship such crap?

-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:jakub@gentoo.org
 GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature ;)