Solve licensing

luca0N commented

2026-07-14 23:18:45 +00:00

Owner

I was originally planning on creating patches for the APKBUILD files provided in the official Alpine Linux repositories, but they don't have any licensing information on them (other than the license of the software for the package itself), unlike PKGBUILD files on Arch Linux. I can't modify these files unless they are explicitly under a libre license.

Unless the licensing for the original APKBUILD files are still unclear, I will have to create new APKBUILD files from scratch and push them in this repository. A bit more convoluted, but luckily building Mingw-w64 is nothing out of the ordinary.

I was originally planning on creating patches for the APKBUILD files provided in the official [Alpine Linux](https://pkgs.alpinelinux.org) repositories, but they don't have any licensing information on them (other than the license of the software for the package itself), unlike PKGBUILD files on Arch Linux. I can't modify these files unless they are explicitly under a libre license. Unless the licensing for the original APKBUILD files are still unclear, I will have to create new APKBUILD files from scratch and push them in this repository. A bit more convoluted, but luckily building Mingw-w64 is nothing out of the ordinary.

luca0N added the

question

label

2026-07-14 23:19:02 +00:00

luca0N commented

2026-07-15 23:33:37 +00:00

Author

Owner

The lack of licensing for APKBUILD files is being discussed in their issue tracker: https://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/alpine/aports/-/work_items/9074

luca0N commented

2026-07-15 23:52:37 +00:00

Author

Owner

I've blamed the APKBUILD files for the relevant packages, and I've counted several unique contributors, one uses a GitHub no reply e-mail address. It seems like contacting each individual user for permission to use these files is not feasible.

These APKBUILD files (for these affected packages) are very trivial, so rewriting them from scratch isn't too much work.

I've blamed the APKBUILD files for the relevant packages, and I've counted several unique contributors, one uses a GitHub no reply e-mail address. It seems like contacting each individual user for permission to use these files is not feasible. These APKBUILD files (for these affected packages) are very trivial, so rewriting them from scratch isn't too much work.

luca0N commented

2026-07-18 23:27:37 +00:00

Author

Owner

I will be creating new APKBUILD files for the Mingw-w64 MSVCRT toolchain. I haven't decided on a license yet, but I will be likely licensing them under the 0BSD license (just like Arch Linux does for their PKGBUILD files).

Should this licensing issue be fixed by upstream (in this case, Alpine Linux), I will reopen this issue so I can replace the custom APKBUILD files with patches for the official packages provided in the official Alpine repositories.

I will be creating new APKBUILD files for the Mingw-w64 MSVCRT toolchain. I haven't decided on a license yet, but I will be likely licensing them under the 0BSD license (just like Arch Linux does for their PKGBUILD files). Should this licensing issue be fixed by upstream (in this case, Alpine Linux), I will reopen this issue so I can replace the custom APKBUILD files with patches for the official packages provided in the official Alpine repositories.

luca0N closed this issue

2026-07-18 23:27:37 +00:00

luca0N referenced this issue

2026-07-18 23:29:07 +00:00

Create new APKBUILD files for the Mingw-w64 toolchain #2

Rows
Columns

Solve licensing #1