From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Add operator + for licenses (EAPI-4 ?)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 05:54:33 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <pan.2009.09.01.05.54.33@cox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 4A9C853D.8050003@hartwork.org
Sebastian Pipping posted on Tue, 01 Sep 2009 04:21:49 +0200 as excerpted:
> However I do notice that "GPL-2+" could make things easier. Why not
> introduce a license group for it like @GPL-2+ or so, instead? That would
> be transparent and use existing means.
I've always thought Gentoo needed "plus" versions of the versioned
licenses, anyway. GPL-2, GPL-2+, GPL-3, and GPL-3+, should all be
different licenses, because really, they are.
Then again, there's the various "waiver" conditions, which I /do/ see are
covered with separate licenses for many of them, already.
But someone already mentioned a license audit, which in practical terms
would be needed to really depend on the LICENSE variable in any case.
--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-01 0:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-31 22:12 [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Add operator + for licenses (EAPI-4 ?) Mounir Lamouri
2009-08-31 22:30 ` Rémi Cardona
2009-09-03 20:50 ` Mounir Lamouri
2009-09-01 2:21 ` Sebastian Pipping
2009-09-01 5:54 ` Duncan [this message]
2009-09-03 21:10 ` [gentoo-dev] " Mounir Lamouri
2009-09-03 21:15 ` Rémi Cardona
2009-09-03 21:27 ` Mounir Lamouri
2009-09-04 4:53 ` Duncan
2009-09-04 15:01 ` Rémi Cardona
2009-09-04 18:52 ` David Leverton
2009-09-04 20:04 ` Rémi Cardona
2009-09-04 20:08 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2009-09-05 14:03 ` Maciej Mrozowski
2009-09-05 15:02 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2009-09-06 0:34 ` Thomas Anderson
2009-09-06 6:31 ` Rémi Cardona
2009-09-03 21:08 ` [gentoo-dev] " Mounir Lamouri
2009-09-04 21:11 ` Sebastian Pipping
2009-09-05 1:06 ` Zac Medico
2009-09-05 8:40 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2009-09-05 9:28 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ulrich Mueller
2009-09-05 10:59 ` Zac Medico
2009-09-05 17:21 ` Mounir Lamouri
2009-09-05 18:41 ` Ulrich Mueller
2009-09-06 0:14 ` Sebastian Pipping
2009-09-05 21:37 ` Zac Medico
2009-10-01 2:01 ` Sebastian Pipping
2009-10-01 13:09 ` volkmar
2009-09-04 15:47 ` Jeremy Olexa
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=pan.2009.09.01.05.54.33@cox.net \
--to=1i5t5.duncan@cox.net \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox