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 A58081381F3 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:28:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B2754E0ABF; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:28:24 +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 1A08CE0AB6 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:28:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.4.5] (blfd-4d0820aa.pool.mediaWays.net [77.8.32.170]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E2E9833E788 for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:28:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <51F7DB94.4000200@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 17:28:20 +0200 From: hasufell User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130630 Thunderbird/17.0.7 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 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] changing the default of ACCEPT_LICENSE in portage References: <51F16EF7.30606@gentoo.org> <20130730150840.GD14765@comet.hsd1.mn.comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <20130730150840.GD14765@comet.hsd1.mn.comcast.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 38ac28cc-c090-4fd1-b277-09be83f41b27 X-Archives-Hash: a8f7f2f8f7896a9e6949f80d99ceb356 On 07/30/2013 05:08 PM, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > On 20:31 Thu 25 Jul , 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". >> >> 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: >> >> ACCEPT_LICENSE="@FREE" >> >> 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. > > Gentoo has been and should remain a pragmatic distribution rather than > promoting a specific licensing philosophy to our users. We are already doing that by declaring: "Gentoo is and will remain Free Software". > We've always > focused on providing *reasonable* rather than *restrictive* or *minimal* > defaults, Setting @FREE as a default _is_ reasonable, because it underlines what is already in our social contract and might help to make people more aware of it at extremely low cost. > in the interest of keeping the barrier to entry lower and > lessening the effort required to set up a functional Gentoo > installation. > That argument has already been brought up here and it doesn't make much sense in this context. It's an effort of changing/adding a _single_ line in make.conf and is even documented in the handbook. > I don't see any conflict between requiring that our system packages be > free software and providing the pragmatic experience that we also > promise to our users in our philosophy: I don't see any conflict between requiring the user to accept unfree licenses explicitly and our philosophy. In fact, we are already forcing interaction with that variable via "-@EULA".