Bug 47941 – New package: net-geoip

• Product: Gentoo Linux
• Status: RESOLVED FIXED

[Description Michael Kohl (RETIRED) 2004-04-15 10:46:06 UTC]

These are the Ruby bindings for GeoIP. 

They are a build option for the ruby-amazon Ebuild I'm about to submit, and only depend on dev-libs/geoip. The ebuild merges and unmerge fine on my ~x86 system.

[Comment 1 Michael Kohl (RETIRED) 2004-04-15 10:47:49 UTC]

Created attachment 29352 [details]
net-geoip-0.06.ebuild

[Comment 2 Michael Kohl (RETIRED) 2004-05-25 05:44:59 UTC]

For what it's worth, but if that ebuild is just sitting here because nobody is willing to maintain it, of course I would do it.

BTW I'm reattaching the file, because I accidently deleted the header when I first submitted it.

[Comment 3 Michael Kohl (RETIRED) 2004-05-25 05:46:09 UTC]

Created attachment 32001 [details]
Corrected ebuild for net-geoip

[Comment 4 Mamoru KOMACHI (RETIRED) 2004-05-25 08:44:02 UTC]

netmon herd: is any of you interesetd in this ebuild? If not,
I'll take it.

However, I cannot find any documentation about the license
of the package. Is it really as-is? We might need to contact
the author to know the license. Also, you should add "|| die"
after make install (otherwise it may lead to incomplete emerge
if make install fails).

Michael: the number of developers in Gentoo is growing but
we really don't have much human resources. If you'd like to 
help us you are welcome. You can start with submitting new
ebuilds and/or suggesting a solution to existing bug
to bugzilla. When you will have shown enough ability to
do Gentoo developers' task we'll recommend you to recruiters@g.o.
If you have any questions about recruiting process, feel free to ask. 
(send me an email about it)

[Comment 5 Lance Albertson (RETIRED) 2004-05-25 08:47:04 UTC]

I'd say go for it. I think most of us are bogged down with our own stuff. Just make sure you do good Q/A on it :)

[Comment 6 Michael Kohl (RETIRED) 2004-05-25 09:01:45 UTC]

I just sent an email to the developers asking for the exact license. According to their form mailer I will get a reply within the next 24 hours and post the reply here.

[Comment 7 Michael Kohl (RETIRED) 2004-05-25 13:13:19 UTC]

The answer came faster than expected:
---
All of my software is currently licensed under the 3-clause BSD 
license.  At some point in the future I will probably relicense 
everything under the BSD license and the OSSALv2, which I haven't 
written yet, but will follow the basic bits from:

http://people.freebsd.org/~seanc/ossal/

in a style that the OSI will approve.

-sc
---
That's the email I got from Sean Chittenden, author of this bindings.

[Comment 8 Michael Kohl (RETIRED) 2004-05-28 03:00:28 UTC]

Created attachment 32199 [details]
License corrected ebuild

Update the ebuild again to have "BSD" as the license. This may not be entirely
correct, but there's no "3-clause BSD license" available in
/usr/portage/licenses, or I'm missing it completely.

I guess that's the license the author's talking about.

I also removed two trainling whitespace errors repoman pointed out.

[Comment 9 Michael Kohl (RETIRED) 2004-05-28 03:01:48 UTC]

Sorry, forgot to paste in the URL of the 3-clause BSD license.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/info/BSD_3Clause.html

[Comment 10 Mamoru KOMACHI (RETIRED) 2004-06-02 11:13:34 UTC]

Sorry for the delay. 3-clause BSD license is what we have in
/usr/portage/licenses/BSD, so LICENSE="BSD" is correct.
I put that ebuild on CVS. Thanks for the ebuild submission.