[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: what about Pine's license?



While the pine license is evil, true. I have a suggestion for the way pine
packages are currently made. The process of installing pine currently is,

apt-get install pine396-src
apt-get install pine396-diffs
cd /usr/src/pine
read the README
dpkg-source -x pine*dsc
cd pine*;debian/rules binary
see warning, press enter, watch it build
cd ..;dpkg -i *.deb

Now, why not have a package just called "pine" that would:

pre-depend on devscripts, a c compiler, and whatever else is necessary to
build pine. And of course on the pine packages themselves. Suggest
pine-docs. With the end result of all this being that a user could type

apt-get install pine

have everything needed be downloaded, built, and installed. With the only
interaction being seeing the warning and pressing enter. The average user
would then not have to worry about licensing issues in such hairy
situations, and be able to use such packages like any others.

-- 
Rafael Kitover
rkitover@io.com

Attachment: pgpSjwl7NoWC6.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: