tech-pkg archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/licenses

  > Given the current situation, I think it makes sense for ruby to be
  > tagged as gpl2, and I don't see any reason to even have ruby-license in
  > pkgsrc/licenses.  The license framework is not supposed to be a complete
  > taxonomy - the purpose is just to enable people to avoid accidentally
  > building software with non-free licenses.
  > ruby-license is so confusing that redistributing something based on it
  > would seem to need advice of counsel.  But GPL2 is well understood, and
  > asking pkgsrc users to put ruby-license in mk.conf seems unreasonable,
  > especially when gpl2 is already in the default list.

  I see and agree with you.

  I'll change it just now.

  Best regards.

Thanks - sorry to seem difficult about this but I am really worried
about the resulting complexity if we don't try hard to limit it.

Attachment: pgpFTAEXBkxpn.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index