Hi, it appears the file /usr/portage/licenses/Apache-2.0 does not contain a current license anymore. It seems Apache shortened the license text meanwhile? I am little bit puzzled what should happen now. I found it while aiming to add an ebuild for Nuitka package with its developer. Please look into the original thread at http://www.freelists.org/post/nuitka-dev/ImportErrors-with-Nuitka045 . Thank you, Martin
Hi, I just checked the actuall diff, and it's totally other things in there, which are unrelated: > APACHE HTTP SERVER SUBCOMPONENTS: > > The Apache HTTP Server includes a number of subcomponents with > separate copyright notices and license terms. Your use of the source > code for the these subcomponents is subject to the terms and > conditions of the following licenses. Suffice to say that it's not the Apache license alone. I am not involved in Gentoo, but I only included the LICENCE.txt file as an emphasis of the actual major license of Nuitka, without looking into the source. I am surprised, anything but the contents of http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 as referenced in the boiler-plate provided for source code, would be there. Yours, Kay Hayen
Since we include Apache-2.0 in the FSF-APPROVED and OSI-APPROVED license groups, the text of the file should be what has been approved by the FSF and the OSI: http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Apache2.0 http://opensource.org/licenses/Apache-2.0 The problem is that if we change the license text, the we need to do a license audit for the 435 packages (1025 ebuilds) that are using Apache-2.0. But I guess that we should better do this in any case, because I doubt that the "APACHE HTTP SERVER SUBCOMPONENTS" licenses apply to all these packages.
Created attachment 358186 [details] Packages with Apache-2.0 in LICENSE I've updated the license file. List of packages is attached.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #2) > The problem is that if we change the license text, the we need to do a > license audit for the 435 packages (1025 ebuilds) that are using Apache-2.0. > But I guess that we should better do this in any case, because I doubt that > the "APACHE HTTP SERVER SUBCOMPONENTS" licenses apply to all these packages. Five years have passed, and nobody (me included) is going to do that audit anytime soon. In any case, the license text has been updated, so let's consider this bug fixed.
