Christian Faulhammer wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Is this something worth pinching for a future EAPI? If we go with the
>> postfix [] form for ranged deps, it'd translate into:
>> LICENSE="=GPL-2" (or equivalently, LICENSE="GPL[=2]")
>> LICENSE="|| ( GPL[>=2] BSD )" (
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:54:57 +0100
> Thilo Bangert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> there is also the legal argument. it's better to state explicitly
>> which versions apply and not have to cleanup the mess, when somebody
>> decides to release GPL-2.5.
>
> That's an argument
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:06:46 +0100
Christian Faulhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > One thing that would need to be decided:
> >
> > LICENSE="GPL-2"
> >
> > Would that require an = prefix? To simplify things, we could say
> > that *only* the postfix [] form counts for licenses...
>
> To
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Is this something worth pinching for a future EAPI? If we go with the
> postfix [] form for ranged deps, it'd translate into:
> LICENSE="=GPL-2" (or equivalently, LICENSE="GPL[=2]")
> LICENSE="|| ( GPL[>=2] BSD )" (or equivalently, ">=GPL-2")
> LI
