On Fri, 04 Feb 2005, Quentin Garnier wrote:
> > # I don't intend to make any commercial use of LAME.
> > ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES.lame=	fee-based-commercial-use
> 
> Packages don't usually come with several licences.  I'd rather have
> something like:
> 
> ACCEPT_LICENSE+= lame

No, that's not good enough, because a package's licence might change
from one version to another.  I want a build failure if a package's
licence changes from one that I have reviewed to one that I have not
reviewed.

--apb (Alan Barrett)