Re: octave license is incompatible with openssl

[Alex Vong]

John Darrington <address@hidden> writes:

> I would not be at all suprised if there were more incompatibilities like
> this.  Ought we not have  a lint rule that checks this?
>
Indeed, in the short term, we could lint for special case, such that
openssl appears as an input for an GPLv[123](+) package.


In the long term, we could have the following in guix. Since licenses
are scheme values. I was thinking we can have procedure like:

  (compatible? l1 l2)

which is a reflexive and symmetric relation. Also, we might be able to
build compound licenses by:

  (dual-license lics ...)

and

  (intersect-license lics ...)

The 3 procedures should satisfy the following "laws":

  (compatible? l1 (dual-license lics ...))

if and only if

  (any (cut compatible? l1  <>) lics)

Similarly,

  (compatible? l1 (intersect-license lics ...))

if and only if

  (every (cut compatible? l1  <>) lics)


How do everyone think?

Cheers,
Alex

> J'
>
> On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 12:35:54AM +0800, Alex Vong wrote:
>      Hi guixes,
>      
>      First, congratulations to Ricardo Wurmus as new maintainer and the new
>      0.11 release is good (it passed all tests)!
>      
>      I notice 'octave 4.0.2' has 'address@hidden' as one of its inputs. As
>      far as I know, gplv3 is incompatible with openssl license
>      (https://people.gnome.org/~markmc/openssl-and-the-gpl.html).
>      
>      How should we fix this?
>      
>      
>      Cheers,
>      Alex