[Nix-dev] environment.allowedLicenses ?

Matthias Beyer mail at beyermatthias.de
Mon Jan 26 14:19:14 CET 2015

On 26-01-2015 14:00:10, Eelco Dolstra wrote:
> Hm, I have the impression the license checking code is becoming pretty heavy at
> this point. For instance, what (realistically) is the use case for whitelisting?

Whitelisting a non-free license.

> Even a basic NixOS system configuration probably has dozens of (free) licenses,
> and I can't imagine users going to the trouble of specifying them all. Also note
> that all this license checking is on the mkDerivation critical path, so anything
> we do there slows down "nix-env -qa".

Of course things have to be optimized here.
> I actually think we should *remove* meta.license entirely (because it doesn't
> provide useful info to users and tends to be wrong or incomplete anyway), and
> replace it with attributes that have operational meaning:

I'm heavily against this. Having the license in the package
information is (IMHO) the right way to do this.

Removing the license of a package is removing information about the
package, which I do not consider a good idea at all. You could remove
the maintainer and version, too, if you remove the license.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Kind regards,
Matthias Beyer

Proudly sent with mutt.
Happily signed with gnupg.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.science.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/attachments/20150126/5145631e/attachment.bin 

More information about the nix-dev mailing list