On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 10:14:48AM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:08:21 -0500 > Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Seems to me, that at least in part, Ralf disagrees with the assertion > > that a problem exists that is worth all this pain of solving. I also still try to understand where the need for this change comes from, see my other mail in this thread. > You mean the problem of mixing thousands of packages together of > varying licenses which may or may not be incompatible? I don't see > how you can possibly think this problem doesn't exist. But didn't we had to deal with this problem on a per package basis until now and will have to do so no matter what overly complex parsing system will be installed? Take for example madwifi, a "GPL2v += || BSDwhatever" licensed software that should be compatible according to the parser with the "GPL2v || syscalls exceptions" kernel ... So you'll creating a mesh where elefants can slip through, and at the end we'll only have added bureaucracy for the packagers with no added value whatsoever - packages will have to be checked against their build and runtime depdencies carefully llllike they had to until now. You can't replace a legal review with a parser ... -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpLfOLztPEn0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
