On 2010-12-26 18:00:43 (+0100), Juergen Weigert
On Dec 26, 10 15:43:42 +0100, Pascal Bleser wrote:
On 2010-12-26 14:47:14 (+0100), Marcus Meissner
wrote: [...] suse:license-to-confirm XML tag. See the update repos for the sample.
Hmmm, ok, thanks. So it's not possible to do it from OBS packages directly.
How should this be implemented in the BS? An entry in a ymp file or something?
Most comfortable would be by convention: a file name in the (OBS) package with a specific name, something like "_EULA.txt", which would be auto-detected by OBS when generating the repository metadata.
Thing is, I've got a funky package here which is GPLv3 but also has an EULA (that one has to agree on before downloading the sources): http://pastie.org/1406533
That does not look sane: "2. RESTRICTIONS Except as expressly granted or permitted herein, you shall not use, assign, sublicense, sell, rent, lease, loan, convey or transfer to any third party the Software." This appears incompatible with GPLv3, unless Canon indicates that such language is overruled by the GPL.
Yeah, I'm a bit puzzled too.
Further down it names 'Canon Bubble Jet Print Filter .. for Linux' and says: Such software modules are free software and you can redistribute them and/or modify them under the terms of GNU General Public License Version 2 published by the Free Software Foundation ("GPL").
Note that this language has no 'or later' options, thus again incompatible with GPLv3.
Ah, true, I didn't spot that one.
Hm, I guess I'll cat the license agreement text from %post then, with something like "I you do not agree, remove this package".
That would technically do, I guess. "7. TERM This Agreement is effective upon your acceptance hereof by using the Software ...."
I still advise against cating an EULA in %post. We have no way to confirm that an end-user ever saw that EULA. Nobody can be bound to an EULA that he never saw.
That's a good point, indeed...
A dialog from a startup script would be much more effective.
As they're CUPS printer drivers, there is no startup script :\
I'll try to find someone to talk to at Canon to clarify.
Please do so. And please confirm with Canon if this EULA is meant to be GPLv3-compatible or not. Please also verify, if source-code is made available for the commands and libraries mentioned in the Appendix.
My friendliest interpretation of the EULA is: (Nothing in the EULA is meant to contradict the GPL, thus) GPLv2 with linking exception
Okay. And if not, I'll try to clarify whether redistribution would still be OK, might be something for non-free.
Merry Christmas, Pascal!
Thanks, to you too, and a happy new year :)
(and thanks for having a look at the license :))
--
-o) Pascal Bleser