From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6441B1381F3 for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 20:29:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 591A5E0A53; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 20:29:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpout.karoo.kcom.com (smtpout.karoo.kcom.com [212.50.160.34]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97AA6E09CB for ; Thu, 25 Jul 2013 20:29:23 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,745,1367967600"; d="scan'208";a="25972460" Received: from unknown (HELO rathaus.eclipse.co.uk) ([109.176.250.128]) by smtpout.karoo.kcom.com with ESMTP; 25 Jul 2013 21:29:04 +0100 Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 21:29:40 +0100 From: "Steven J. Long" To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-project] Re: changing the default of ACCEPT_LICENSE in portage Message-ID: <20130725202940.GA8481@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org References: <51F16EF7.30606@gentoo.org> <51F1713D.4030607@gentoo.org> <51F1717D.1090301@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <51F1717D.1090301@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 7be6c493-1c59-47d1-afa6-05d25d2fdc41 X-Archives-Hash: f7c20f19337e4843236ff7e4f7d484c5 hasufell wrote: > Matthew Thode wrote: > > hasufell wrote: > >> Gentoo has a social contract [1] which makes a lot of noise about > >> free software. However our default settings allow to use almost > >> any kind of non-free license such as "all-rights-reserved". > >>=20 > >> While I see nothing wrong with gentoo providing proprietary stuff > >> (and I have created a lot of such games ebuilds), I think > >> according to our philsophy and social contract we should make > >> people aware of free software and because of that also change the > >> default to: > >>=20 > >> ACCEPT_LICENSE=3D"@FREE" > >>=20 > >> This is only about the _default_. We will have to change the > >> handbook at "1.d. Licenses" [2] and might also make a news item. > >>=20 > > This is what I thought the default license group already was, I'm > > all for it :D >=20 > The default is currently: >=20 > ACCEPT_LICENSE:"* -@EULA" >=20 > in /usr/share/portage/config/make.globals This is reasonable, but can we have the above old-default commented out in = make.conf, above the new setting? That way things are transparent, and users who want = to switch to using non-free can do so easily without the EULA stuff being pulled in, = aiui it would be if users simply put "*" in there. After all, as you yourself wrote about: > adding a line such as: ACCEPT_LICENSE=3D"*" =2E.users are likely to reach for that by default, too, when they shouldn't= accept @EULA generically, but via package.license. Ch=C3=AD-Thanh Christopher Nguy=E1=BB=85n wrote: > Also this would affect the kernel sources when deblobbing is disabled. > > I am not against this move, but this will require a lot of effort in > educating users about the consequences. Presumably stages have been built, and machines installed using just @FREE?= I'd just like assurance that these "consequences" are known not to affect a standard= desktop install, or that this will be tested thoroughly before the switch, in which= case it is not, one would hope, imminent. Regards, steveL --=20 #friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)