Date: Mon, 27 May 2024 12:57:28 +0900 From: Tatsuki Makino <tatsuki_makino@hotmail.com> To: Daniel Engberg <daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net>, David Wolfskill <david@catwhisker.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Maintainer] Help determining proper LICENSE for x11-wm/piewm? Message-ID: <SI2PR01MB5036535FAFBBCEE88340EA52FAF02@SI2PR01MB5036.apcprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> In-Reply-To: <75509267a0aa1d26562be79e8dcee41f@mail.infomaniak.com> References: <ZlKe9b14G5WqR18g@albert.catwhisker.org> <75509267a0aa1d26562be79e8dcee41f@mail.infomaniak.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello. What I say may turn out to be bullshit :) In short, it doesn't matter what the license is, it's how it controls Can the FreeBSD installer include built packages? Can packages be included on FreeBSD installer disks sold on the FreeBSD Mall ( https://www.freebsdmall.com/ ) ? When the distfile fails to download, can it be downloaded from MASTER_SITE_BACKUP? If there are no matching licenses, I think we can concoct new licenses and control them. I don't know if it's just a good example, but I think print/epson-inkjet-printer-escpr2 is applicable to the example where the license clause is included in the distribution file, and audio/libamrnb is applicable to the example where the license clause is not included in the distribution file. It's a surprisingly difficult part that needs to be done accurately, so if I'm saying something wrong, please point it out right away :) Regards.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?SI2PR01MB5036535FAFBBCEE88340EA52FAF02>