withdraw support for license overrides #241
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
For out-of-tree builds, packages should now state the license that's expected to apply, since the resulting RPMs could be distributed in binary form inside of kits. Signed-off-by: Ben Cressey <[email protected]>
webern
approved these changes
May 27, 2024
jpculp
approved these changes
May 28, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue number:
Closes #100
Description of changes:
Drop support for overriding licenses via
Licenses.toml. This doesn't work properly in an out-of-tree build world, since the override must be set when the RPM is built if it is shipped in a kit, but may be needed downstream when the RPM is installed.Testing done:
Built
twoliterwith this change and then built Bottlerocket after applying the change from bottlerocket-os/bottlerocket#3991.Terms of contribution:
By submitting this pull request, I agree that this contribution is dual-licensed under the terms of both the Apache License, version 2.0, and the MIT license.