www-client/qutebrowser: Add scripts use flag #11049
Conversation
gentoo-bot
added
assigned
maxf130
changed the title
gentoo-bot
changed the title
Copyright policy changePlease note that on 2018-09-15 Trustees have approved new Gentoo copyright policy. All contributions made to Gentoo need to follow this policy. If you include the Signed-off-by line in your commit message, you indicate that you have read the policy and agree to its terms. For more detailed explanation, please see the new Gentoo copyright policy explained article. Pull Request assignmentSubmitter: @maxf130 www-client/qutebrowser: Linked bugsBugs linked: 622980 In order to force reassignment and/or bug reference scan, please append Docs: Code of Conduct ● Copyright policy (expl.) ● Devmanual ● GitHub PRs ● Proxy-maint guide |
gentoo-bot
added
assigned
| @@ -55,6 +55,9 @@ python_install_all() { | |||
| domenu misc/${PN}.desktop | |||
| doicon -s scalable icons/${PN}.svg | |||
|
|
|||
| exeinto /usr/share/qutebrowser/userscripts/ | |||
| use scripts && doexe misc/userscripts/* | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is grabbing the README.md and any other non-scripts that may be added later. I'm also mildly concerned that the license for some of these scripts isn't clear. By nature of them being in the qutebrowser repo can we assume GPL-3?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
True it's grabbing the README.md. I don't think that's necessarily a problem, the directory they are being installed to is not intended to be in the PATH. It might make sense to install an explicit list of files to guard against future inclusions though.
As far as licensing goes, I'm not sure. Some scripts (qute-pass for instance) have an explicit Copyright notice, others don't. I will open an issue on the qutebrowser repo to ask for clarification. In the meantime we could limit the effect of the scripts USE flag to just install those userscripts with an explicit copyright notice.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you limit to the scripts with a known license, I'll happily merge.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Installation of userscripts is now limited to those with an explicit license. I've also added qutebrowser v1.6.0 to the PR.
|
Mind rebasing on master (instead of merging) and squashing your commits? That make it easier for me to keep attribution when merging. |
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/622980 Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.60, Repoman-2.3.12 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Friedersdorff <max@friedersdorff.com>
Done, (I think). I had to brush up on my git fu to make this work, I hope this is what you meant. |
Pull request CI reportReport generated at: 2019-03-11 10:39 UTC No issues found |
|
Excellent git fu! Merged. ddd3840 www-client/qutebrowser: Add scripts use flag |
Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/622980
Package-Manager: Portage-2.3.60, Repoman-2.3.12
@radhermit, @jsbronder