[gentoo-dev] GLEP23 - Updates and call for further discussion

[gentoo-dev] GLEP23 - Updates and call for further discussion

[Jason Stubbs]

Hi all,

GLEP23 (ACCEPT_LICENSE) is finally moving along. >=portage-2.0.51_rc8 includes 
an updated check in repoman to ensure that LICENSEs follow the standard 
DEPEND syntax. LICENSEs can (and should) be updated to use the new syntax if 
you are using a portage that supports it. There is no backward compatibility 
issues as use of LICENSE is limited to the repoman check and --search 
display.

The other part of the GLEP that needs to be finalized is with regard to 
license grouping. There are a couple of minor issues that need to be 
discussed and any issues brought up before everything is implemented. Those 
that I can think of are:

* Group prefix character? Previously '@' was suggested
* Uppercase or lowercase?
* Does "@group1 -@group2" make sense? What is the behaviour?
* Where will the groups be stored? profiles/license.groups seems to fit.
* How will the groups be stored?

USE groups will more than likely be implemented at the same time as this and 
will follow the same sceme, so be aware of that when expressing any opinions.

I ask that people look over the GLEP once more and bring up any other points 
of concern as well. Speak now or forever hold your piece. ;)

Regards,
Jason Stubbs

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP23 - Updates and call for further discussion

[Luke-Jr]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 936 bytes --]

On Sunday 17 October 2004 3:29 am, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> * Group prefix character? Previously '@' was suggested

$ might make more sense, so users can simply define more groups by doing a 
simple GROUPNAME="bla"

> * Uppercase or lowercase?

The Gentoo tree likes lowercase usually. Personally, I'd like mixed, but that 
could just be me.

> * Does "@group1 -@group2" make sense? What is the behaviour?

Sure... @OSI -@FSF could mean "OSI approved licenses, but not ones by the FSF"
Not sure what the purpose would be in this particular case, but that's no 
reason not to plan ahead.

> USE groups will more than likely be implemented at the same time as this
> and will follow the same sceme, so be aware of that when expressing any
> opinions.

I've already setup USE groups on some systems by defining USE_GROUPNAME and 
using $USE_GROUPNAME under USE...
-- 
Luke-Jr
Developer, Utopios
http://utopios.org/

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP23 - Updates and call for further discussion

[Jason Stubbs]

On Sunday 17 October 2004 12:43, Luke-Jr wrote:
> On Sunday 17 October 2004 3:29 am, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> > * Group prefix character? Previously '@' was suggested
>
> $ might make more sense, so users can simply define more groups by doing a
> simple GROUPNAME="bla"
>
> > USE groups will more than likely be implemented at the same time as this
> > and will follow the same sceme, so be aware of that when expressing any
> > opinions.
>
> I've already setup USE groups on some systems by defining USE_GROUPNAME and
> using $USE_GROUPNAME under USE...
>
> > * Does "@group1 -@group2" make sense? What is the behaviour?
>
> Sure... @OSI -@FSF could mean "OSI approved licenses, but not ones by the
> FSF" Not sure what the purpose would be in this particular case, but that's
> no reason not to plan ahead.

The first two and the third conflict. If you are after bash like syntax then 
you either have to drop the subtractions (as bash-like substitution is done 
first) or that part of portage would need a major rewrite and would not be 
backward compatible.

> > * Uppercase or lowercase?
>
> The Gentoo tree likes lowercase usually. Personally, I'd like mixed, but
> that could just be me.

Nothing to say. I don't really mind however it's done. Perhaps it shouldn't 
even be a concern of mine; rather I should be thinking about case-sensitive 
or insensitive. I think we'd all agree that case-sensitive is better. :)

Regards,
Jason Stubbs

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP23 - Updates and call for further discussion

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 932 bytes --]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:29:09 +0900 Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| * Group prefix character? Previously '@' was suggested

@ is nice and visible, and doesn't need any fancy bash handling to avoid
it being substituted.

| * Uppercase or lowercase?

Upper for consistency with my GLEP :)

| * Does "@group1 -@group2" make sense? What is the behaviour?

Kinda icky... It's more icky for USE groups, since people will probably
start doing @GNOME -@KDE and wondering why they're getting -X...

| USE groups will more than likely be implemented at the same time as
| this and will follow the same sceme, so be aware of that when
| expressing any opinions.

Heh, I'd better send out another draft of that GLEP, eh? BTW, I don't
think USE groups has been approved yet...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Vim, Fluxbox, Sparc, Mips)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]