Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 18:14:27 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bernhard_Fr=F6hlich?= <decke@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r303225 - in head/emulators: virtualbox-ose virtualbox-ose-additions virtualbox-ose-kmod virtualbox-ose/files Message-ID: <CAE-m3X2GAEsaO9EDtF6aMeEu1ghaXG8M-f9JNvvwW=YPJB1hEA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120827132752.GA59345@FreeBSD.org> References: <201208271253.q7RCrfNp099110@svn.freebsd.org> <20120827130920.GA55054@FreeBSD.org> <CAE-m3X2Fb4cgQHm5q0fm3A2N3E1gtbdXFYcEKUNMk=DvtA4g1g@mail.gmail.com> <20120827132752.GA59345@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 03:24:00PM +0200, Bernhard Fr?hlich wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 12:53:41PM +0000, Bernhard Froehlich wrote:
>> >> +LICENSE= GPLv2
>> >> +LICENSE_FILE= ${WRKSRC}/COPYING
>> >
>> > Why specify LICENSE_FILE for standard licenses? License framework was
>> > supposed to reduce filesystem spamming with identical copies of GPL, not to
>> > contribute to it further.
>>
>> Ever looked at that file before complaining? It is GPLv2 but with a few notes
>> that make it worth keeping:
>
> I was not complaining, I was asking. Given all the exceptions below, I in
> turn wonder if it's OK to set LICENSE to GPLv2.
I'm not a lawyer but they claim that the code is under GPLv2 in the
Licensing FAQ.
In fact if you dig deeper you find the complete list of licenses that
are used in the
vbox code.
https://www.virtualbox.org/manual/apa.html
https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ
--
Bernhard Froehlich
http://www.bluelife.at/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAE-m3X2GAEsaO9EDtF6aMeEu1ghaXG8M-f9JNvvwW=YPJB1hEA>