81bc106e08
This commit clarifies that the meaning of the `meta.sourceProvenance` field is independent of and unaffected by the value of the `meta.license` field. This is based on the intent of the RFC author as expressed here: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/161098#issuecomment-1081270201 This clarification is added for two reasons: 1. If in the future there should be some disagreement about what `sourceProvenance` to assign to a package, this may help resolve the disagreement. Any interpretation of `sourceProvenance` which is influenced by the `meta.license` is clearly an incorrect interpretation. 2. If it should turn out that it is impossible to disentangle `sourceProvenance` from `meta.license`, this would indicate the need for changes to the `sourceProvenance` scheme. That change might be as simple as replacing the sentence added by this commit with some other sentence explaining how the two fields influence each other. This commit implements the recommendation made in the paragraph of this comments which begins with "Please say this explicitly...": https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/161098#issuecomment-1081309089 |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| cross-compilation.chapter.md | ||
| meta.chapter.md | ||
| multiple-output.chapter.md | ||
| platform-notes.chapter.md | ||
| stdenv.chapter.md | ||