Spider wrote:   [Sat Nov 22 2003, 04:43:10PM EST]
> in a case where you can choose to accept either the MPL or the GPL for
> example, the license should be 
> LICENSE="GPL | MPL" 
> 
> And if its for example either released as FPL  (Foo package License ) or
> GPL+ LGPL parts, it should be :
> LICENSE="FPL | (GPL LGPL)" 
> 
> This is the logic that "makes sense" for me.  in a case where its
> multiple licensed, you have to agree to all such licenses, or it won't
> match.

This is fine with me, and I can go ahead and fix the colorschemes
package.  I guess this would necessitate a rev bump if ACCEPT_LICENSES
were implemented so that users would be properly informed, but since
ACCEPT_LICENSES isn't implemented yet, I won't bump the rev.

I suppose that other packages can be fixed as we go along, but this
information needs to be added to the developer's guide / ebuild-writing
guide / skel.ebuild.  Swift?

Before we go any further, does this warrant a GLEP or can we implement
as a bug-fix to 17367?  It seems to me that all voices have been
supportive so far, even if there are different opinions (/me waves to
Matt Kennedy) regarding free/non-free software in Gentoo.

Aron

-- 
Aron Griffis
Gentoo Linux Developer (alpha / ia64 / ruby / vim)
Key fingerprint = E3B6 8734 C2D6 B5E5 AE76  FB3A 26B1 C5E3 2010 4EB0

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to