From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 16 01:57:57 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6678416A4CE for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 01:57:57 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 399CE43D1F for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2004 01:57:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from [192.160.235.2] (cs242743-143.austin.rr.com [24.27.43.143]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81219148D9; Wed, 15 Sep 2004 20:57:56 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark Linimon Organization: Lonesome Dove Computing Services To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 20:56:38 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <20040915093120.3067472e@dolphin.local.net> <20040915175615.11c92103@zork> <20040916004320.GB68701@thought.org> In-Reply-To: <20040916004320.GB68701@thought.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200409152056.38900.linimon@lonesome.com> cc: Gary Kline cc: Robin Schoonover cc: "Jack L. Stone" Subject: Re: Drop of portindex X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 01:57:57 -0000 On Wednesday 15 September 2004 07:43 pm, Gary Kline wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 05:56:15PM -0600, Robin Schoonover wrote: > > I think we may want to record what the license for the port is in the > > Makefile. For example: > > > > LICENSE= GPL > > > > If multiple parts are somehow under multiple licenses, we could also do: > > > > LICENSE= GPL BSD This was discussed recently and the majority opinion was that the default setting of these Makevars would be 'stale'. In addition, a few people were concerned that we might be making an implied guarantee about the state of the licenses. My personal opinion is that we shouldn't try to create a mechanism to enforce policy based on a small number of unusual cases. (ISTR someone else asking for something in src/ to be removed some time ago, but such things are relatively rare). But there's no argument that port committers should be checking licenses for new ports to make sure that we can redistribute them. Also, any software author really ought to consider making her or his license unambiguous from the first hack attempt. (Yes, I follow my own advice here -- each file in portsmon was tagged BSDL from the beginning.) mcl