4 ms·
They do have a policy to only include free software [1]: > We only accept formulae that use a Debian Free Software Guidelines license or are released into the
by vmarchaud 3y ago
They do have a policy to only include free software [1]:
> We only accept formulae that use a Debian Free Software Guidelines license or are released into the public domain following DFSG Guidelines on Public Domain software into homebrew/core.
[1]: https://docs.brew.sh/License-Guidelines https://docs.brew.sh/License-Guidelines
- INTPenis 3y agoBut the license hasn't changed, so that raises the question of why was it included in the first place?
- chmod775 3y agoThe license did change. From MPL 2.0 to BSL.
- Hackbraten 3y agoThe license will change to BUSL for all upcoming upstream releases. [1] [1]: https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-updates-licensing-faq-based-on-community-questions https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/hashicorp-updates-licensing-f...
- slikrick 3y agodid you miss the memo?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jameshart 3y agoIn home-brew core. And the reasoning is that home-brew isn't strictly a package manager, it is a dependency installer and builder - it pulls down sources and everything they depend upon (as source packages too, usually), and builds them locally. So as a user of home-brew you're trusting the formulae you install from to be for things you are allowed to pull down and build locally. Licenses matter. Hashicorp (or anyone else) can maintain a source tap of their own - when you opt in to using a third party tap you're trusting that tap's licensing as well. And there's also 'casks' which are for non-source distributions, which home-brew can install as well, where source licensing isn't important.