public inbox for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] What should the default acceptable licenses be?
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2019 17:51:40 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_=CfxUf_-Zhjv8WPt1r=QSfRD=DgGX4045E3LqpdLG5KA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e2d92c1c-f129-6c45-becf-6ad48387bf17@gentoo.org>

On Sat, Jan 26, 2019 at 4:04 PM Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> My personal opinion is we should have a default accepting FSF and OSI
> approved free/libre licenses and require acceptance for anything else
> though package.license / ACCEPT_LICENSE.

From a practical standpoint is this going to block anything used on
our stage3s or boot CDs needed for hardware support, such as firmware
blobs/etc?  I imagine most packages like this would not have
FSF/OSI-approved licenses.  That includes linux-firmware.

I'm not sure if those are installed by default or how essential they
are to actually boot/use any common hardware.

Aside from this, Gentoo has always been more about pragmatism when it
comes to licensing.  We certainly make it easy to restrict licenses
and have a pure-free system, but I'm not sure how painful it would be
for users to have this be a default.

In particular how likely is this to cause users to end up doing a
substantial rebuild 5 minutes after booting their stage3 just to get
the system back to a more "practical" state?  Granted, bindist
probably already causes these sorts of issues but we have no choice
there.

-- 
Rich


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-01-26 22:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-26 21:04 [gentoo-project] What should the default acceptable licenses be? Kristian Fiskerstrand
2019-01-26 21:32 ` [gentoo-project] " Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
2019-01-27  9:47   ` Ulrich Mueller
2019-01-26 21:45 ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-01-26 22:12 ` [gentoo-project] " Michał Górny
2019-01-26 22:51 ` Rich Freeman [this message]
2019-01-27  1:25   ` Alec Warner
2019-01-28 22:27   ` Matt Turner
2019-01-29 16:54     ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-01-29 17:28       ` Brian Evans
2019-02-05 20:03         ` Roy Bamford
2019-01-29 17:53       ` Alec Warner
2019-01-29 18:27         ` Rich Freeman
2019-01-29 18:41           ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2019-01-29 18:56             ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2019-01-30  0:12               ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-01-30  0:35                 ` Alec Warner
2019-01-29 17:53       ` Rich Freeman
2019-01-31 16:53       ` Matt Turner
2019-02-05 23:47 ` [gentoo-project] " Kristian Fiskerstrand
2019-02-12 19:40   ` Alec Warner
2019-02-13  9:34     ` Thomas Deutschmann
2019-02-13  9:50       ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2019-02-13 10:44       ` Ulrich Mueller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAGfcS_=CfxUf_-Zhjv8WPt1r=QSfRD=DgGX4045E3LqpdLG5KA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=rich0@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox