Ryan Hill wrote:
On the other hand, it also seems completely ridiculous from a practical
POV to have to wait 30 days (and waste arch team resources) to fix an
incorrect licence on a stable package.
And have everyone recompile the package, thus wasting cpu cycles and
users' time.
I would have
Yuri Vasilevski a écrit :
> so, my point is that licences are very important in some environments
> and to some people, and having an inconsistently can cause serious
> legal problems to users. So it is very important to keep them in sync
> in all tree of upstream, portage tree and vdb tree.
And p
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 08:10:06 +0200
Ulrich Mueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Should LICENSE changes require a revision bump?
>
> No, since it would be a waste of users' resources.
>
> For example, if a dev has missed a change from GPL-2 to GPL-3 (which I
> guess is a common case), would you
> Should LICENSE changes require a revision bump?
No, since it would be a waste of users' resources.
For example, if a dev has missed a change from GPL-2 to GPL-3 (which I
guess is a common case), would you really have users reinstall the
package in this case? What would be the benefit?
Ulrich
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:17:48 -0600
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should LICENSE changes require a revision bump?
No.
Any ebuild should be published with a correct reference to a license.
If you initially publish the ebuild with a bad reference, you simply
correct it later on. It's not a
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:17:48 -0600
Ryan Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Should LICENSE changes require a revision bump?
A licence changes what get's installed, ok the files are the same, but
the meaning of having the same files is different. So I say yes.
> It kinda seems to me the answer shou
I have an interesting (to me anyways) question.
Should LICENSE changes require a revision bump?
It kinda seems to me the answer should be yes. I don't know if any PM
currently implements LICENSE filtering so there may not be any
technical reason for it yet. And so I guess it comes down to a
phi
