From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 12 22:28:41 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA16416A4AB for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:28:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mi+mill@aldan.algebra.com) Received: from mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9330213C461 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:28:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mi+mill@aldan.algebra.com) Received: (qmail 16377 invoked from network); 12 Dec 2007 22:01:59 -0000 Received: from aldan.algebra.com (HELO aldan-mlp) ([216.254.65.224]) (envelope-sender ) by mail6.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 12 Dec 2007 22:01:59 -0000 From: Mikhail Teterin To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 17:01:57 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <20071212213200.D576216A469@hub.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20071212213200.D576216A469@hub.freebsd.org> Organization: Virtual Estates, Inc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-u" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200712121701.57460.mi+mill@aldan.algebra.com> Subject: Ion3 removal (Re: Ion3 license violation) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 22:28:41 -0000 > The simple fact is that Tuomo has some strange desire to blame packagers > for all his problems with software and users. Yes, license-crafting lawyers are usually more polite and don't engage in=20 direct communications with forums such as ours. Their licenses suck much=20 more, however -- think Java, cdrtools, or Skype, and all the other=20 closed-source packages. Put Tuomo's demands in perspective, for crying out= =20 loud... > It's impossible for the FreeBSD ports system to guarantee compliance with > his arbitrarily chosen "28 days" rule. =9AIf he's going to demand that his > terms be followed, then it has to come out of the ports. Actually, it can be done -- when building the port, the date on the distfil= e=20 (or that on the most recent source-file /extracted/ therefrom) can be check= ed=20 against the current date and a prominent message can be issued warning of=20 possible obsoleteness (sp?)... I just wish we avoided the rash decisions like "let's remove everything=20 written by the guy we don't like NOW" -- if only in the name of "ports=20 slush"... In the hurry to spite the admittedly unpleasant-sounding author,= =20 the needs and expectations of the users were neglected. I've never used ion, but, judging from some responses here, it is an=20 appreciated piece of software. -mi