From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-2842-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org> Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53AB21381F3 for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 19:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 953B5E09C0; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 19:07:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E928CE09B6 for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 19:07:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.33] (143.Red-2-137-62.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [2.137.62.143]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pacho) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C5E033DAC9; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 19:07:44 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1374779261.4925.16.camel@localhost> Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] changing the default of ACCEPT_LICENSE in portage From: Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Cc: licenses@gentoo.org, Alexander Berntsen <alexander@plaimi.net> Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 21:07:41 +0200 In-Reply-To: <CAEdQ38HHbiLdn4fico17G+M=cYzOHtegXUaEKtJAHmQgdxMoSQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <51F16EF7.30606@gentoo.org> <1374778562.4925.9.camel@localhost> <CAEdQ38HHbiLdn4fico17G+M=cYzOHtegXUaEKtJAHmQgdxMoSQ@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.4 Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: ad8077cc-8940-47b5-b89b-e09c0709fb33 X-Archives-Hash: e9953792cfb77dd7eade5f75d1b174f6 El jue, 25-07-2013 a las 11:58 -0700, Matt Turner escribió: > On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote: > > I disagree because I don't think "promoting" free software should imply > > we shouldn't allow non-free software to be installed easily :/ > > Let's not claim that modifying make.conf is anything but trivial. > It's trivial (I always overwrite it to simply put "*"), but why someone installing a package not using that FREE licenses will need to edit it? How does it "promote" free software? I don't think making installation of other software more difficult is the right way to promote it. What apart of showing users a new "error" by default adds this decision? I think the way to promote free software is to be sure our virtuals list free alternatives in first time, that way people will get free software when packages are providing same functionality. But feel free to do what you prefer, I haven't ever expended much time in all this licensing stuff (even preferring free licenses) and I know how this usually end (this reminds me last time I talked with an openBSD developer that works with my father about how he disagrees with GPL and similar :P)