From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A99D138334 for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 15:51:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4AE36E08A0; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 15:50:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3F74E089B for ; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 15:50:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from a1i15 (host2092.kph.uni-mainz.de [134.93.134.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ulm) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D464335CA7; Sun, 26 Aug 2018 15:50:53 +0000 (UTC) From: Ulrich Mueller To: =?utf-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= Cc: gentoo-dev , licenses@gentoo.org, qa Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Solving the problem of huge number of wrong LICENSES=*GPL-[23] References: <1535279962.1066.24.camel@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2018 17:50:39 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1535279962.1066.24.camel@gentoo.org> (=?utf-8?Q?=22Micha?= =?utf-8?Q?=C5=82_G=C3=B3rny=22's?= message of "Sun, 26 Aug 2018 12:39:22 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) 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: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: c077ca82-53b5-413b-a729-4e76d2483ee2 X-Archives-Hash: 0c693209c4efe2c503ba8a5b48c69e9a --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>>>> On Sun, 26 Aug 2018, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: > 1. introducing additional *-only licenses that explicitly indicate > that a newer version is not allowed, e.g. GPL-2-only, LGPL-3-only etc. I don't like this at all, because LICENSE=3D"GPL-2" means exactly the above, namely GPL version 2, no later version. Therefore, "GPL-2-only" would be completely redundant to it. What we could do (and what already exists in several ebuilds) is to add a *comment* to the LICENSE line, like "# GPL-2 only". This could be required for every new ebuild. > 2. annotating the unsuffixed licenses with a warning that they may > mean either x-only or x+ due to frequent mistake. I don't think that's a good idea either. Also we're not allowed to change the license documents: "Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license document, but changing it is not allowed." > 3. make repoman warn whenever non-specific variant is used, telling > developers to verify whether it's x-only or x+. Repoman could check for a comment in the LICENSE line as well, I guess? > 4. start migrating packages to x-only or x+ appropriately. See above. We could instead migrate ebuilds with "GPL-2" to either: LICENSE=3D"GPL-2+" or: LICENSE=3D"GPL-2" # GPL-2 only Optionally, the comment can be removed once all ebuilds have been converted. > 5. eventually, remove the non-specific licenses and make repoman error > out with clear explanation. Ulrich --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEZlHkP3TnuTbxrN0HwwkGhRxhwnMFAluCzFEACgkQwwkGhRxh wnMNogf/dHwbQtDhmM6jz5QmXd4a/MN/BxeHjpPZh10z34nSc/LJlzX+NOvAAyxP JTjaVJZpymiBJIpbKeJvTVgaKw6rOKKgj6ilHL6swe/QZB2QPEKyBEY7WzRClpoK VZa6u3AoCV4S7d9g5cTCuihJTotQlyjjrvfy+EL8YtbdgYmRLvxG+pnpUnxzHh3j ve8Nsu4tt+nV2ljziBWZF7M0G/FS4bth6slx9bFMHSiTDnfEN9Mz8jryfDT4iHOv 6pM5LWfyZPE/vfT06A/Jc97FgW4TBomZEnCUeE4/BqlV9R4jLLSJs6rPpgBX5J1u VmXbgK8yE5hw8bOSuCuwTadlYTsAlA== =SJC4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--