GNU Affero General Public License

[D'Arcy J.M. Cain]

I am working on a package (OpenERP) which has the subject license. We
don't seem to have that in mk/license.mk. I would add it in except
that there is a reference to it in the comments which suggests that
someone was already aware of it. Am I supposed to use one of the
existing GPL licences or should I add it (gnu-agpl-v3)?

By the way, if I add the above license to my Makefile I don't get an
error or even a warning that the license doesn't exist. Shouldn't it
tell you if it is an invalid license?

[David Holland]

Post by D'Arcy J.M. Cain
I am working on a package (OpenERP) which has the subject license. We
don't seem to have that in mk/license.mk. I would add it in except
that there is a reference to it in the comments which suggests that
someone was already aware of it. Am I supposed to use one of the
existing GPL licences or should I add it (gnu-agpl-v3)?

It's in licenses/...

[Greg Troxel]

Post by D'Arcy J.M. Cain
I am working on a package (OpenERP) which has the subject license. We
don't seem to have that in mk/license.mk. I would add it in except
that there is a reference to it in the comments which suggests that
someone was already aware of it. Am I supposed to use one of the
existing GPL licences or should I add it (gnu-agpl-v3)?

gnu-agpl-v3 is in licences. Do you mean that, or some other version?

board@ decided not to put gnu-agpl-v3 in DEFAULT_ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES, as
noted in license.mk:

# As an exception to the Open Source or Free policy, the board
# of The NetBSD Foundation has decided that licenses that
# trigger obligations from use (rather than redistribution),
# such as the Affero GPL, should not be in
# DEFAULT_ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES.

Post by D'Arcy J.M. Cain
By the way, if I add the above license to my Makefile I don't get an
error or even a warning that the license doesn't exist. Shouldn't it
tell you if it is an invalid license?

Presumably you are talking about "license file not found" rather than
"license name not in ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES". Yes, probably it should
warn.

[Greg Troxel]

Post by Greg Troxel

Post by D'Arcy J.M. Cain
By the way, if I add the above license to my Makefile I don't get an
error or even a warning that the license doesn't exist. Shouldn't it
tell you if it is an invalid license?

Presumably you are talking about "license file not found" rather than
"license name not in ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES". Yes, probably it should
warn.

Actually, did you verify that pkglint doesn't complain? I think it
does, and that seems like the right place to check.

[D'Arcy J.M. Cain]

On Wed, 02 Jul 2014 18:03:58 -0400

Post by Greg Troxel

Post by Greg Troxel
Presumably you are talking about "license file not found" rather
than "license name not in ACCEPTABLE_LICENSES". Yes, probably it
should warn.

Actually, did you verify that pkglint doesn't complain? I think it
does, and that seems like the right place to check.

In fact I missed it and the license was there, even under the name that
I guessed it should use. However, I did experiment with an invalid
license and pkglint did give a correct warning and it failed to build.