Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 469990 - JWasm licence (OSWPL-1.0 based). What license_groups should i add it to?
Summary: JWasm licence (OSWPL-1.0 based). What license_groups should i add it to?
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: [OLD] Unspecified (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Licenses team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks: 431706
  Show dependency tree
 
Reported: 2013-05-15 19:40 UTC by Sergei Trofimovich (RETIRED)
Modified: 2013-05-16 06:43 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments
jwasm-2.10-License.txt (jwasm-2.10-License.txt,20.65 KB, text/plain)
2013-05-15 19:40 UTC, Sergei Trofimovich (RETIRED)
Details

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Sergei Trofimovich (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2013-05-15 19:40:48 UTC
Created attachment 348424 [details]
jwasm-2.10-License.txt

$SUBJ

I have 3 major questions:
- How should i names it? JWasm or OSWPL-1.0?
- What license_groups should I include them besides OSI-APPROVED
- Should I add PROPERTIES=interactive to ebuild? (license says about "click-approve" if possible)

Attaches license from JWasm tarball.

Thanks!
Comment 1 Ulrich Müller gentoo-dev 2013-05-15 20:33:42 UTC
> I have 3 major questions:
> - How should i names it? JWasm or OSWPL-1.0?

We should follow the OSI and SPDX naming and call it "Watcom-1.0":
http://opensource.org/licenses/Watcom-1.0
http://spdx.org/licenses/Watcom-1.0

> - What license_groups should I include them besides OSI-APPROVED

It's interesting that the FSF explicitly lists this license as non-free:
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#Watcom

So, it can be added to the OSI-APPROVED group only.

> - Should I add PROPERTIES=interactive to ebuild? (license says about
>   "click-approve" if possible)

No, this would only be annoying for the user. The license says that it should be either click-wrap or alternatively a statement that any use constitutes acceptance of the license. The first paragraph (in all-caps) is such a statement, so that should be enough.
Comment 2 Sergei Trofimovich (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2013-05-16 06:43:50 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> > I have 3 major questions:
> > - How should i names it? JWasm or OSWPL-1.0?
> 
> We should follow the OSI and SPDX naming and call it "Watcom-1.0":
> http://opensource.org/licenses/Watcom-1.0
> http://spdx.org/licenses/Watcom-1.0
> 
> > - What license_groups should I include them besides OSI-APPROVED
> 
> It's interesting that the FSF explicitly lists this license as non-free:
> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.en.html#Watcom
> 
> So, it can be added to the OSI-APPROVED group only.
> 
> > - Should I add PROPERTIES=interactive to ebuild? (license says about
> >   "click-approve" if possible)
> 
> No, this would only be annoying for the user. The license says that it
> should be either click-wrap or alternatively a statement that any use
> constitutes acceptance of the license. The first paragraph (in all-caps) is
> such a statement, so that should be enough.

Committed as Watcom-1.0 only in OSI-APPROVED group.

Thanks!