[aur-dev] AUR 4 and licensing
linas_fi at ymail.com
Mon Apr 13 22:32:53 UTC 2015
On 12/04/15 16:25, Lukas Fleischer wrote:
> I like this idea. GPL3 is probably the best choice, given that we
> already use the GPL for most projects.
Many PKGBUILDs won't even pass the threshold of originality (ie. not
copyrightable = Public Domain). And for patches, forcing (or encouraging)
a GPL 3 license for a non-GPL program is a really really bad idea. Patches
should be under the same (or more liberal) license as the original program,
in order to promote sharing and even being merged upstream.
A PKGBUILD is (usually) little more than a series of ./configure and make
incantations.* A MIT/CC-BY license would be more than enough if any.
* They may be hard to discover and maintain, and it is certainly nice to
recognise such efforts, but stating a bunch of configure flags doesn't
More information about the aur-dev