License Package Sources

Our package sources currently do not have explicit licenses. This RFC proposes to license all Arch Linux package sources under the terms of the Zero-Clause BSD license.

Rendered version: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/svenstaro/rfcs/-/blob/license-package-sources/rfcs/0040-license-package-sources.rst

added 1 commit

• ef81433b - RFC for licensing package sources

Compare with previous version

Just out of curiosity, why would you argue that the relevant part of the Terms is not applicable here? https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/terms-of-service/#_contribution_licenses

My understanding would be that once you start to consider it copyrightable material this clause starts to apply

added 1 commit

• d5a0b6c8 - RFC for licensing package sources

Compare with previous version

Also see https://lists.parabola.nu/pipermail/dev/2022-April/008232.html for a take on this problem.

added 1 commit

• 6c5323fa - RFC for licensing package sources

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 3ab5ac34 - Add git command to allowlist

Compare with previous version

added 3 commits

• 6c5323fa...ab6d6374 - 2 commits from branch archlinux:master
• 45d2ae4a - RFC for licensing package sources

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 7eeed1c5 - RFC for licensing package sources

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 2eeb6289 - RFC for licensing package sources

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 6f6742e5 - RFC for licensing package sources

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• bd0c29a1 - Add references to Parabola GNU discussions

Compare with previous version

marked this merge request as ready

changed title from RFC for licensing package sources to License Package Sources

It would be nice to link the rendered document, so that it's easier read without needing to hunt down the file :)

https://gitlab.archlinux.org/svenstaro/rfcs/-/blob/license-package-sources/rfcs/0040-license-package-sources.rst

changed the description