Thanks for this patch!
I've kicked off a discussion with hackage administrators and the haskell
committee about the general approach we want to take to the license
situation on hackage, and how to properly document our policies. It seems
to me that merging this makes sense regardless, but I don't know what
others may think?
Cheers,
Gershom
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Francesco Ariis
Dear Cabal developers, spurred by this discussion on haskell-cafe [1], I attach a small patch on licence warnings. It:
- reverts AllRightsReserved as PackageDistInexcusable, as it was before this commit [2]. Reading the comments in Check.hs, this datatype is for issues which "[are] OK in the author's environment but [are] almost certain to be a portability problems for other environments", which I think it is the case.
- adds a PackageDistSuspicious warning on OtherLicense. The text of the warning encourages the developer to choose from licences suggested by the OSI or FSF, if they don't want to use a licence recognised by cabal.
Thanks -Francesco
[1] http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2015-February/118411.html [2] https://github.com/haskell/cabal/commit/8d449ba3231445726272eac4dcf7b2b4a550...
_______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list cabal-devel@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel