Re: Repackaging android blobs into pkgsrc packages

[David Brownlee <abs%absd.org@localhost>]

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 17:23, Aleksej Lebedev <root%zta.lk@localhost> wrote:

> http://blog.qt.io/blog/2016/01/13/new-agreement-with-the-kde-free-qt-foundation/)
>
> I don't fully understand all specifics of licensing (I am an engineer,
> not a lawyer),
> but the problematic part seems to be this one (from the same blog post):
>
> LGPL version 3 differs from version 2.1 in two fundamental aspects. It
> explicitly protects the right of the end user to not only compile their
> modifications, but also deploy and run them on the target device. This
> essentially prevents the creation of fully locked-down devices.
>
> Specifically, the problem is that lgpl-3 prevents so-called tivoization.
>
> Anyway, the license does matter to us. So we will have to maintain
> qt-5.6.
> I was wandering if pkgsrc community wants to see it as a separate entity
> (x11/qt56)?

Would you anticipate setting up something like
"QT5_VERSIONS_INCOMPATIBLE=56" similar to
PYTHON_VERSIONS_INCOMPATIBLE, or is this just to build your own
internal tools against?

I think if it is able to be installed and run concurrently with qt-5.7
(or later) on a machine, then as it has a valid use case (licence),
and if its actively maintained and doesn't cause issues for bulk
builders it should be welcomed into pkgsrc (but someone closer to the
coalface may have a more relevant opinion :)

David

David