Re: CVS commit: pkgsrc/pkgtools/pkg_install/files/lib

[Ryo ONODERA <ryo_on%yk.rim.or.jp@localhost>]

Hi,

From: Alistair Crooks <agc%pkgsrc.org@localhost>, Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 
19:29:48 +0100

> On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 08:21:08PM -0500, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> But, if you object to this, then I think you're really objecting to the
>> above policy -- which is a reasonable discussion to have, separate from
>> whether agpl is properly added to the default list under the current
>> documented policy.
> 
> Yes, the objection is to the current policy - we should not just be
> rubber-stamping FSF licenses, since their licensing requirements are
> different to TNF's - principally more stringent and onerous.
> 
> We see a number of companies who will not use GPLv3 or LGPLv3 software.
> 
> We see a number of BSD projects which will not include GPLv3 or LGPLv3
> software.
> 
> Both of these decisions have been taken following legal advice.
> 
> I think we should respect the wishes of those entities, and remove
> GPLv3 and LGPLv3 from the current list, and also remove AGPLv3 too.

For what it may be worth, NetBSD current accepts gcc under GPLv3 and
gmp and mpfr under LGPLv3.

And devel/readline is released under gnu-gpl-v3. Should we remove
readline from default accepted packages? I feel it is inconsistent
with reality.

Thank you.

--
Ryo ONODERA // ryo_on%yk.rim.or.jp@localhost
PGP fingerprint = 82A2 DC91 76E0 A10A 8ABB  FD1B F404 27FA C7D1 15F3