Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow unfree redistributable builds? #687

Open
roberth opened this issue Jul 20, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Allow unfree redistributable builds? #687

roberth opened this issue Jul 20, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@roberth
Copy link
Member

roberth commented Jul 20, 2024

Currently software such as vault is not built by ofborg, and I don't really understand why.
bsl11 may not be open source, but it is source-available and redistributable = true;.

I could see an ideological argument here, but I don't think that should an excuse for being unhelpful to Nixpkgs maintainers.
So I'd like to ask, is this limitation intentional?

@SomeoneSerge
Copy link

Preceding conversation:

A relevant conversation is NixOS/nixpkgs#83884, in particular the suggestion to introduce a "curated [white]list" of licenses instead of unfreeRedistributable (also an example of implementation from Gentoo)

As to my opinion, I think the solution is hierarchical:

  1. We should evaluate everything (unfree, insecure, cross) in order to compensate for the lack of static typing. IMO this we should start doing now, maybe in a concurrent job. The only excuse not to do this is Nix's performance, and it's a bad excuse because developers' time is more expensive than the compute
  2. We should build the tests for whitelisted unfree licenses, but we should abstain from distributing the closures to the "user"
  3. For a subset of white-listed licenses, we should "build" and cache the FODs (e.g. the singular contention point about the CUDA EULA is whether "patchelf"-ing substitutes a "modification"; there's seemingly no reason, however, not to keep the original tarballs from disappearing)

A tangential point is that we seem to lack tools to plug a third party Ofborg-like CI in and out of the Nixpkgs forge...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants