| Version: | 1.2 |
|---|---|
| Last-Modified: | 2004/03/11 02:35:40 | +
| Last-Modified: | 2004/03/11 02:35:40 |
| Author: | Jason Stubbs <jstubbs at gentoo.org>, |
| Status: | Draft | +
| Status: | Accepted |
| Type: | Standards Track |
| Content-Type: | text/x-rst | +
| Content-Type: | text/x-rst |
| Created: | 9-Mar-2004 |
| Post-History: | 8-Mar-2004 10-Mar-2004 | +
| Post-History: | 8-Mar-2004 10-Mar-2004 25-Oct-2004 |
Repoman has been updated to check for the LICENSE syntax.
+Many users wish to regulate the software they install with regards to licenses for various reasons [1]. Some want a system free of any software that is not OSI-approved; others are simply curious as to what @@ -89,9 +94,9 @@ currently implemented using eutils.eclass.
Most ebuilds are for software which is released under a single license. In these cases, the current LICENSE variable can remain as is. For example:
@@ -112,7 +117,7 @@Almost all users are willing to install any software that is FSF-approved. Other users are willing to install any software and implicitly accept its license. To this end, portage will also need to @@ -124,7 +129,7 @@ behaviour of portage.
This GLEP proposes that a user be able to explicitly accept or decline licenses by editing a new variable ACCEPT_LICENSE in /etc/make.conf. Again, to keep things simple, the syntax should be @@ -140,7 +145,7 @@
At a minimum, emerge must handle unaccepted licenses the same way that it handles blockers. That is, with the --pretend flag the not-yet-accepted license should be listed in the output. Without the @@ -156,16 +161,16 @@
An implementation of this proposal should make it easy for users wishing to regulate their software without affecting those that don't.
There should be no change to the user experience without the user explicitly choosing to do so. This mandates that the configuration variable be named ACCEPT_LICENSE as some users may @@ -174,7 +179,7 @@ set to @NON-INTERACTIVE.