From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JuYmt-0005Rs-U6 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 May 2008 20:01:52 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B6DA3E0817; Fri, 9 May 2008 20:00:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8844BE0812 for ; Fri, 9 May 2008 20:00:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (xray.science.oregonstate.edu [128.193.220.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16FEB65E37 for ; Fri, 9 May 2008 20:00:32 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 13:00:31 -0700 From: Donnie Berkholz To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] app-crypt/kstart License questionable Message-ID: <20080509200030.GC3847@comet> References: <20080509191030.GB20481@mephisto> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080509191030.GB20481@mephisto> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-Archives-Salt: bc43634e-11a8-4fee-be55-c0534f10cd70 X-Archives-Hash: bdb8130e092265e5df0118aa596a4d19 On 21:10 Fri 09 May , Michael Hammer wrote: > Hi! > > I'd like to add kstart to the tree and have a question to the license > of the package. It's some kind of combination of the MIT License with > a few minor licenses. Should I add the whole license file to the tree? > Here is the link: > > http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/software/kstart/license.html > > There is a very similar situation on the sys-auth/pam_krb5 package > which is also from Russ Allbery. There we provide not the full license > needed for the package. It's nicest if you can map each license back to an individual one in the tree. People generally ignore the build system when doing that. When doing the licensing thing, the way things seem to go in Gentoo is to get the actual license language mapped to a license file but ignore any differences in copyright ownership (e.g., Stanford vs X Consortium). Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list