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 29428138334 for ; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:39:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AFA8AE098F; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:39:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.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 6E930E097A for ; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:39:10 +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 0F93234B442; Sat, 21 Sep 2019 23:39:07 +0000 (UTC) From: Ulrich Mueller To: Matt Turner Cc: gentoo development , =?utf-8?B?TWljaGE=?= =?utf-8?B?xYIgR8Ozcm55?= , licenses Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Adding 'GPL-2-only', 'GPL-3-only' etc. license variants for better auditing References: Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 01:38:57 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Matt Turner's message of "Sat, 21 Sep 2019 15:01:38 -0700") 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 08a19cb4-65a7-4c69-9460-464124d2935e X-Archives-Hash: dc0501b82e8727a8744841b452300cbd --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>>>> On Sun, 22 Sep 2019, Matt Turner wrote: > We are all aware. But the point is to explicitly put "-only" in the > LICENSE metadata so that ebuild authors are less likely to confuse > GPL-2 vs GPL-2+. I don't see how renaming could possibly help with that. >> Plus, it would result in paradoxical entries like "|| ( GPL-2-only >> GPL-3-only )" for a package that can be distributed under GPL >> versions 2 or 3 but no later version. > That paradoxical entry is pretty clear to me. Not the same thing. "GPL-2-only+" might be clear as well, which doesn't imply that it isn't paradoxical. > It's not a one-time audit. Micha=C5=82 has a history of fixing things in > ways that does not allow the issue to return. I imagine that's what > he's doing here, and it would not surprise me at all if something > could be wired into CI to help ensure this. If it's not a one time audit, it implies that we will permanently have three variants. This would be a lot of effort, for a tiny gain. After all, there is absolutely no difference in ACCEPT_LICENSE filtering between GPL-2 and GPL-2+. > Trivial concern solved with a news item. As I've said before, if the intent is to do a tree-wide audit, then this should be done in a way that has no impact on users. For example, by adding a comment, instead of changing the LICENSE variable. Ulrich --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEZlHkP3TnuTbxrN0HwwkGhRxhwnMFAl2GtJEACgkQwwkGhRxh wnPD6Af/aqDnibrr7ic4L3KOjdWEXGmQkyVjRsNvKI8MQ/aewQO6LPryD5tWJwOg rZBJyNas4t95AzQiBtv27HOduEV/7zeOFXg7QFI9Jruhteb1YQywzLwsHjsDWFHh Io+R71iw++rmdOXnZQYhUED8VBCehr5bmT1sc0SFx+EzlrqNovxfSJzdpYIYRLxg cHrH/Ejk2VP5QNSrXv7Iyv3ECpbg6kwAMHbxhdShklL0Qx7utzWEgB7fFPhbwPgR EvDB2TvgWlHnng+B2uywm9nZQP/KFbu6XCOB3dWdL/5z8SSeTFHVit7ys3iOEOIz DkmXGmX7L0LkYmunm5AdC7ylCWusLw== =13ec -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--