[openbeos] Re: Libraries
- From: Matt Madia <mattmadia@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 20:23:56 -0500
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005 18:20:30 -0500, Michael Phipps
<mphipps1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> And this is a fairly ugly case...
>
> OpenSSL is under an old style BSD license - requiring mention in whatever
> eventual documentation comes about. This isn't necessarily so bad for us, but
> the creeping feeling that I have is that we could have something of a
> licensing
> issue for people who want to make distributions. Our code is all MIT. Other
> code that we have in CVS is GPL, LGPL, etc. None of this is an issue for US,
> as
> we have it set up so that anyone can get the source.
>
> But let's say that Joe DistroMaker comes along and wants to make a
> distribution
> of some sort available. Unless he strips out all of the GPL'ed code, he has to
> either make it available on his website or include a written offer to send out
> the code. Not to mention that he has to include AT LEAST OpenSSL in his
> documentation.
>
> It seems to me that as the completion of R1 approaches (or, at least, the
> point
> at which we are unlikely to bring too many more packages into the tree), we
> should probably do a license sweep and be able to alert distro makers on what
> the situation is. Not that it is our legal responsibility, but because any
> misery on the community is our misery too.
>
> I think that OpenSSL should come into our tree, despite the licensing issue.
> It
> was brought up to me before that it should come in, but at that point, it was
> "just" feature creep. Now that it is necessary to support something basic that
> R5 supports (email), I think that we should include it. For people to be
> unable
> to read their email out of the box would be pretty tough to explain away...
more likely than not, im underthinking this but:
What about automating this process?
For example,
when a user runs `jam`, by default have all of the necessary
documentation for BSD (and similar licensed software) appended to
$BUILD/MUST_BE_INCLUDED/Licenses.Documentation.ReadMe ( where
Licenses.Documentation.ReadMe is a text/plain or similar text file )
As far as needing to include source code, in the case of (L)GPL and
similar licenses, do something similar.
`Jam` by default will create a
$BUILD/MUST_BE_INCLUDED/src/packageName.zip for each (L)GPL item.
Anything else that "must be included" with Haiku distributions, can
go in there. I'm sure that as time goes on, that list of things will
grow.
IMO, automating this process will make it easier for people to
properly create distributions.
A simple --no_license_doc --no_license_zip flags would override this
default behavior.
one final note, i understand that the exact implementation of this
will most likely be different, but what do you think of the overall
idea ?
Other related posts:
