Re: QPL in /usr/share/comon-licences

[idalton@ferret.dyndns.org]

On Tue, Jun 12, 2001 at 01:07:48AM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
> Previously John Galt wrote:
> > No.  However if it's resolved so that the GPL must be included in each
> > deb, there's really no more point in common-licenses, thus neatly solving
> > the whole issue at hand.
> 
> That's not true, you could replace the GPL document in the package
> with a symlink to a copy in common-licenses in the postinst for
> example.

Rummaging through memory on the earlier discussion, I recall that one
proposal was the addition of a 'license.tar.gz' in the executable (deb)
package file, so the license(s) would not necessarily be in the data.tar.gz
portion. Assuming the relative increase in package size is not too oneris,
this could solve the 'license must be distributed with the executable code'
issue in favour of using common-licenses.

Plusses:
0) License files are included with the executable portion of the package,
   as well as the source portion.
1) Does not take any additional space on the (user's) system, assuming
   downloaded debs are removed after installing.

Minuses:
0) Will take up somewhat more space on the mirrors (GPL is 7k compressed,
   LGPL 10k; I'd guesstimate 10k/package average, not checking any license
   out of common-licenses)
1) `license.tar.gz' must be after `data.tar.gz' in order for it to be
   compatible with existing dpkg-deb. Ought not to be a problem.

-- Ferret