Subject: Re: ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES+=opera-license
To: Jason R. Fink <email@example.com>
From: Alistair Crooks <AlistairCrooks@excite.com>
Date: 11/01/2000 07:15:44
On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 12:56:04 +0900, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> >What might make the most sense (although I readily admit, it would
> >be a pain in the arse) might be to use a system database like rcfiles
> >to simply have YES NO options in them with an accompanying comment to
> >explain what it is the user is mucking with, for example:
> >section ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES+= \
> > commercial="NO" # this controls acceptence of commercial lisc.
> > artistic="YES" * this controls acceptance of the artistic lic.
> >even though 9 out of 10 times the user will _read_the_docs_anyway_
> >this goes a long way for the isolated user(s).
> basically the idea is to have more comment, right?
> how about this? this will require no change to bsd.pkg.mk.
I believe that it's not just more comment - I'd much prefer the actual text
of the licence itself, since any text I added to summarise the licence may
be woefully inadequate, legally incorrect and/or misleading, and thereby
more harm than it's worth.
I'd prefer to have each licence in a *sigh* pkgsrc/licenses directory. (the
"sigh" is for the spelling). Then when a new licence is added, its name goes
into the mk.conf.example file, and a copy of the licence would be added to
pkgsrc/licenses/<licence>. It would also be most handy to add the GPL (1 and
2) and the LGPL licences there, as well as the BSD licence.
Alistair Crooks (email@example.com)
Say Bye to Slow Internet!