Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add stress-make.

[Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>]

On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 11:53:33AM -0500, Eric Bavier wrote:
> Hello Guix,
> 
> I'm mostly looking for a second-opinion on the license of this package.
> Other comments welcome too, of course.
> 
> * gnu/packages/debug.scm (stress-make): New variable.

> +      (version (string-append "1.0-" revision "." (string-take commit 7)))

It appears they never made a release, so I think we should use "0.0.0"
instead of "1.0".

> +         (uri (git-reference
> +               (url "git://github.com/losalamos/stress-make.git")

I think it's better to use the HTTPS protocol instead of the Git
protocol, unless there is some reason not to. What do you think?

https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-on-the-Server-The-Protocols#The-Git-Protocol

> +      (inputs
> +       `(("make-src" ,(package-source gnu-make))))

How about "make-source", since we seem to shun abbreviations?

> +      (arguments
> +       ;; stress-make's configure script insists on having a tarball and does
> +       ;; not accept a directory name instead.  To let the gnu-build-system's
> +       ;; patch-* phases work properly, we unpack the source first, then
> +       ;; repack before the configure phase.

o_O

> +      ;; stress-make wrapper is under BSD-3-modifications-must-be-indicated,
> +      ;; and patched GNU Make is under its own license.
> +      (license (list bsd-3 (package-license gnu-make))))))

Perhaps we should call it non-copyleft instead of bsd-3?