Is gimps distributed with an EULA license 'GIMPS' that requires RESTRICT="bindist mirror"? Please check and fix if the qa script raised a false alert, please assign to QA. We would have to fix that too. https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/159ccc7134/output.html#sci-mathematics/gimps
(In reply to Jonas Stein from comment #0) > Is gimps distributed with an EULA license 'GIMPS' that requires > RESTRICT="bindist mirror"? Yes. I still think that the GIMPS license belongs into the @EULA group, as we had concluded in bug 465568. Also https://www.mersenne.org/legal/#EULA hasn't changed.
I don't know (IANAL), but why RESTRICT=mirror ? GIMPS's EULA specifically says "Software is free to download and use indefinitely"
Free to download doesn't imply free to redistribute. The reasoning why an EULA usually implies mirror (and bindist) restriction, goes along the following lines: - Copyright law cannot restrict users' rights beyond all-rights-reserved. This means that in many legislations users will be allowed to compile the program, run it, make a backup, and to patch it as necessary, without permission from the copyright holder. - Therefore, if copyright holders want to enforce additional restrictions (e.g., usage restrictions) then they need the user to enter into a contract with them. - The user won't enter into such a contract when downloading the program from a third-party site. - Thus, when a license allows free redistribution, it cannot be an EULA. tl;dr Please add RESTRICT="mirror bindist" to the ebuild.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #3) > Free to download doesn't imply free to redistribute. > > The reasoning why an EULA usually implies mirror (and bindist) restriction, > goes along the following lines: > - Copyright law cannot restrict users' rights beyond all-rights-reserved. > This means that in many legislations users will be allowed to compile the > program, run it, make a backup, and to patch it as necessary, without > permission from the copyright holder. > - Therefore, if copyright holders want to enforce additional restrictions > (e.g., usage restrictions) then they need the user to enter into a contract > with them. > - The user won't enter into such a contract when downloading the program > from a third-party site. > - Thus, when a license allows free redistribution, it cannot be an EULA. > > tl;dr Please add RESTRICT="mirror bindist" to the ebuild. Ok. Now it's clear. Will do ASAP.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #3) > tl;dr Please add RESTRICT="mirror bindist" to the ebuild. One last question: straight to stable or revbump and stabilization in 1 month?
(In reply to Paolo Pedroni from comment #5) > One last question: straight to stable or revbump and stabilization in 1 > month? Revbump and straight to stable, because only metadata will change.
(In reply to Ulrich Müller from comment #6) > Revbump and straight to stable, because only metadata will change. Thanks again. Will do in a few minutes.
The bug has been closed via the following commit(s): https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=bcfd7000cb44006b4fc7a05bec45545c18042422 commit bcfd7000cb44006b4fc7a05bec45545c18042422 Author: PPed72 <paolo.pedroni@iol.it> AuthorDate: 2020-05-26 11:16:03 +0000 Commit: Ulrich Müller <ulm@gentoo.org> CommitDate: 2020-05-26 11:54:22 +0000 sci-mathematics/gimps: add RESTRICTs due to license Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/725402 Signed-off-by: Paolo Pedroni <paolo.pedroni@iol.it> Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.99, Repoman-2.3.22 Signed-off-by: Ulrich Müller <ulm@gentoo.org> sci-mathematics/gimps/{gimps-29.8.6.ebuild => gimps-29.8.6-r1.ebuild} | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
