[arch-dev-public] GPL Compliance: A beginning
aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Sat May 31 15:09:54 EDT 2008
On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 3:04 AM, Roman Kyrylych
>> <roman.kyrylych at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 2008/5/22 Thayer Williams <thayer at archlinux.org>:
>>>> On 5/21/08, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> However, now that you mentioned swt, it brings up a good point. We
>>>>> can't do this for things like flashplugin just yet. So, should I
>>>>> create some sort of list of packages to NEVER generate sources for?
>>>> I think it would be a good idea to implement a blacklist. A lot of
>>>> factors may warrant its use (size, license, version, etc.)
>>> Hmm, I can only think about packages that we have
>>> a special permission to redistribute for:
>>> virtualbox-additions in Community and (I may be totally wrong here)
>>> flashplayer in Extra), don't know about others.
>>> (BTW both packages' "source" and binary are almost the same)
>>> What I don't know if redistribution from out site covers our mirrors too.
>> Ok, so this ran for all repos. I blacklisted a few known bad ones
>> (bash and readline, the mirror used for the source is borked), and the
>> following huge list of packages failed:
>> Take a second and scan these please - if you can, please correct the source.
>> As Eric pointed out elsewhere, we can merge source change from trunk
>> with archrelease, without the need to re-release the package (this
>> will fix abs too)
> Keep in mind there's probably dupes, as it runs for both x86_64 and
> i686 (and checks for an existing source for the correct version). Let
> me try to clean those up real quick
Sorted. 431 packages:
More information about the arch-dev-public