From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 30853 invoked by uid 1002); 22 Nov 2003 06:52:34 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 21253 invoked from network); 22 Nov 2003 06:52:33 -0000 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org References: <200311191114.25081.pauldv@gentoo.org> <200311211050.59578.jasonbstubbs@mailandnews.com> <200311210226.hAL2QNe4093277@mxsf04.cluster1.charter.net> <20031121031332.GB22586@time> <20031121100737.GJ1502@gentoo.org> <32878.141.166.236.158.1069410832.squirrel@spidermail.richmond.edu> <1069412078.4883.15.camel@bengal.lan> <20031121173254.GA24867@cerberus.oppresses.us> From: Matthew Kennedy Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 00:47:59 -0600 In-Reply-To: <20031121173254.GA24867@cerberus.oppresses.us> (Jon Portnoy's message of "Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:32:54 -0500") Message-ID: <8765hc99wg.fsf@killr.ath.cx> User-Agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo internal structure X-Archives-Salt: b890edca-5917-4c40-ad39-d72b2bb6ae29 X-Archives-Hash: 661a25541d8df26a4747558a37468baa Jon Portnoy writes: > On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 02:54:39AM -0800, Erik Swanson wrote: >> On Fri, 2003-11-21 at 02:33, donnie berkholz wrote: >> > I think we should accept all the licenses by default except the ones for >> > which the ACCEPT_LICENSE variable originally existed (the id games ones), >> > since users must be forced to read and agree to those. This would keep the >> > change seamless for the user unless said user wishes to change things. >> >> As a user, I'd prefer if only OSI-approved licenses were accepted by >> default. This also seems like it'd be most in keeping with the Gentoo >> Social Contract. >> > > The social contract states that Gentoo Linux will never _depend_ on > nonfree software. However, we still provide it. If we moved over to a > Debian-esque "if you want nonfree software, you need to change settings" > it would irritate a decently large number of people. [...] Jon, That's such a vague statement we have in the social contract. I've always wondered what it meant specifically. Matt -- Matthew Kennedy Gentoo Linux Developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list