From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Dec 21 17:04:32 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BA856D5
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 17:04:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from be-well.ilk.org (be-well.ilk.org [23.30.133.173])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 628981260
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 17:04:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lowell-desk.lan (lowell-desk.lan [172.30.250.41])
 by be-well.ilk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F87C33C22
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 12:04:21 -0500 (EST)
Received: by lowell-desk.lan (Postfix, from userid 1147)
 id 885C939828; Sat, 21 Dec 2013 12:04:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org>
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [RfD] Merging fortune ports
References: <20131221142710.GA50067@spectrum.skysmurf.nl>
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 12:04:18 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20131221142710.GA50067@spectrum.skysmurf.nl> (A. J. van Werven's
 message of "Sat, 21 Dec 2013 15:27:10 +0100")
Message-ID: <4461qirv8t.fsf@lowell-desk.lan>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (berkeley-unix)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 17:04:32 -0000

"A.J. 'Fonz' van Werven" <freebsd@skysmurf.nl> writes:

> I happened to notice that there are already several misc/fortune* ports
> and it takes only the slightest bit of imagination to come up with several
> more. Hell, I alone can think of at least a dozen or so. However, we
> probably don't want to fill the ports tree with a whole bunch of ports
> that are pretty much the same except for the one or two files they
> install. Moreover, who is to say which fortune ports get accepted and
> which don't? This got me thinking:
>
> Would it be a good idea to merge all fortune* ports into one and use the
> OPTIONS framework to let the user select which cookie jar(s) they wish to
> install?

That would be a fine idea, as long as it doesn't raise any license
problems. We don't actually consider or track licenses on any
fortune files or ports.  I don't think that's a problem at the
moment, but it's very difficult to be positive, especially with
regard to collection copyrights.

To be honest, I was surprised at how *few* fortune files we have in
ports. I maintain three or four "jars" for my own use, and expected
that at least *some* people would have shared theirs.