[aur-dev] AUR 4 and licensing

David Manouchehri david at davidmanouchehri.com
Mon Apr 13 15:16:49 UTC 2015

> I like this idea, but I don't think it's sound to consider something
> GPL-licensed because the author checked a box or accepted the TOC. I doubt
> that has any legal significance.

I agree that accepting a one time ToS agreement is hardly binding. That's
why I suggested printing out a message with a Git hook saying everything
you push is going to be GPL, it's a bit harder to claim ignorance when you
see that message every time.

We're already in the gray area since there's thousands of packages with no
license explicitly listed, and I don't think it's sane to suggest removing

> Wouldn't it make more sense to use a mandatory two-line header like below?

This switch to Git is already going to cost us a lot of maintainers who
simply don't feel like learning it, I can't say I'm in favor for imposing
any more requirements.

I'm also not really a fan of littering my PKGBUILDs with static text
either. Listing the current maintainer and contributors is already less
than ideal (with the move to Git, I guess we could stop listing the
contributors inline since they're in the logs).

More information about the aur-dev mailing list