Re: [gentoo-dev] Old eclasses - candidates for removal?

2009-06-05 Thread Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Petteri Räty wrote: > Ulrich Mueller wrote: ... >> A quick scan shows that the following eclasses were deprecated more >> than three years ago, and are used by no ebuild in the tree: >> >>2002-05-25 inherit.eclass >>2003-12-11 kde-i18n.ecla

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Reminder for June 11

2009-06-05 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Rémi Cardona wrote: > My plan is to go over each package as time permits, check the license and > then make the x-modular eclass set the default license to MIT instead of > ${PN}. > > I could definitely use a hand to check all those packages :) > Here's a list of pa

Re: [gentoo-dev] Old eclasses - candidates for removal?

2009-06-05 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: > kde-source.eclass > and i am not sure but i think kde-base.eclass too > kde-dist.eclass is used only by monolithic kde3 ebuilds that i plan > to drop after 3.5.10 stabilization so it will be deprecated too > On Fri, 5 Jun 2009, Tobias Klaus

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Reminder for June 11

2009-06-05 Thread Rémi Cardona
Nirbheek Chauhan a écrit : The x11 team[1] came to the conclusion that following RedHat's lead and just using MIT as license for Xorg packages should suffice since they are quite careful about these things. This should definitely be better than the current practice anyway. That's indeed my plan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council Reminder for June 11

2009-06-05 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:56 AM, Tiziano Müller wrote: > Default ACCEPT_LICENSE > -- > Goal: A possible default value for ACCEPT_LICENSE has been proposed. Decide > whether that's ok. What happens to the X11 license files (one for each app)? > The x11 team[1] came to the conclus