From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-2884-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 86C281381F3
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:18:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 94C57E09FD;
Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:18:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F361AE0956
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 15:18:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vb0-f44.google.com with SMTP id e13so840610vbg.31
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:18:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=/wpaXjAcJ72sHZGGJeU3VvQkLnttDhc96bpGPnFJGmQ=;
b=h8xOwXO02iZ8SKG3NjMgdl4mDH7VfqaPnWdH0wzQ5hqTnATzArSE8OxQ0uPXP+wD1c
lnGTNU4nbPr1DztRCpWa+IGS2gAgEVKyEkLJn8n5Tjnw9zOr8EwkaceGaj4fysSnq2Uc
FsY21ka7cVdGoLGL3rmjho25ArpJxWy28YpaT5oO1xPZcfPP4hQrC4D2dbnsIJ/NJVOO
qpmz/h96xKJugbduu0/ZCbSmCrOK+Qx4ogA55Z+hzpbdkPc8DxmSxNynlL9LkxYX4y0g
edYaC0VL29TjQ0MSTxEEGgHu9r/PxR+H9YvTujhK8Y/sMPuZPMKaBWkPk7ick02Aqpxl
ut7g==
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
X-Received: by 10.52.165.165 with SMTP id yz5mr16922797vdb.102.1375283889988;
Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:18:09 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.52.73.74 with HTTP; Wed, 31 Jul 2013 08:18:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51F8FA16.4050406@gentoo.org>
References: <51F16EF7.30606@gentoo.org>
<11373502.YvSFGzKmHV@kailua>
<51F8F56E.8050402@gentoo.org>
<4561512.MTgbeqIep0@kailua>
<51F8FA16.4050406@gentoo.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 11:18:09 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: SXXCn2EQISUY5WjsuOssiR-ojE0
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_=aS3tGya+m=rDY6SPgpkRLhs5bYh=K-Ov+LSwHO1tw7w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] changing the default of ACCEPT_LICENSE in portage
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: b70dc6ec-4484-497a-8e15-b3d14162ca47
X-Archives-Hash: 1534762480badd20363b5a7746eced82
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:50 AM, hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 07/31/2013 01:46 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>>
>> We're not Debian, and that is a good thing=99.
>>
>
> You miss the point. This thread is not about banning ebuilds which let
> you install unfree software.
>
You're thinking of gNewSense, or one of the 47 distros on the FSF
webpage that nobody has heard about. :)
I won't throw in my own two sense. Personally, I'm on the fence here.
I think this is a matter of values and largely boils down to ESR vs
RMS to some extent. I would say that those who want to make a change
probably have the burden of justifying the change. You don't need to
explain your rationale - you've already done a great job with that. I
think the bigger hurdle is whether the community buys in, though this
will only impact new users.
If there were some easy way to take a poll it might be interesting to
see the results. Dare I suggest a forum post?
To be constructive, I think I'll try building a desktop in a VM and
just see what the day-to-day impact of your proposal actually is.
Nvidia drivers really only come to mind as the biggest stumbling block
for most - the days of proprietary codecs and such are mostly behind
us I think. Those who oppose the change might point out specific
"killer apps" that this gets in the way of.
Rich