On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Rémi Cardona <r...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Le 28/12/2009 06:36, Vincent Launchbury a écrit : >> 1) Not all of the licenses are completely accurate. For example, the >> Linux kernels are listed as soley GPL-2, yet they contain blobs of >> non-free firmware. > > Indeed, that's a very good point. And that's precisely why I was against > ACCEPT_LICENSE to begin with. > > It's a good idea on paper, but it's just not feasible at a large scale > (like portage) without a proper _team_ of devoted people sifting through > code and license blobs to make it useful. I'm also pretty sure a couple > lawyers would be needed as well. >
I think we can simply follow debian and fedora's lead on this. They have the lawyers, and being in the same bowl as them would be a good idea if any problems ever crop up. One area where we're in a fishy situation (distinct from debian/fedora) is our distribution of isos and stages without the adjoining sources[1]. This situation always makes me queasy. But I'm digressing here... > Unless people dedicate time and effort, ACCEPT_LICENSE is useless. > Not entirely useless, and maintainers can, and should, spend time making sure ACCEPT_LICENSE is complete and accurate. > [snip] > > The rest of your points are indeed all valid as well. > > I can only encourage you to either work with individual developers to > get ebuilds fixed (USE=bindist or whatever) or join our ranks to fix > this yourself if you really want a "pure" Free Gentoo. > ++ on this. We're a direct-to-users distro; we empower you and give you the means to empower yourself. We probably have the easiest and most direct way to get recruited (although it's strenous on the recruiters side ;). 1. Actually, I was thinking we could take the result at the end of src_prepare, tarball it up, do it for all the packages we have in the iso, tar up all *those* and serve the end result up too. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
