From owner-svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Sun Sep 9 03:36:36 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1E701083BBE; Sun, 9 Sep 2018 03:36:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yuri@freebsd.org) Received: from shell1.rawbw.com (shell1.rawbw.com [198.144.192.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 527DD83379; Sun, 9 Sep 2018 03:36:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from yuri@freebsd.org) Received: from yv.noip.me (c-24-4-131-132.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.4.131.132]) (authenticated bits=0) by shell1.rawbw.com (8.15.1/8.15.1) with ESMTPSA id w893aXBK034033 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 8 Sep 2018 20:36:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from yuri@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: shell1.rawbw.com: Host c-24-4-131-132.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [24.4.131.132] claimed to be yv.noip.me Reply-To: yuri@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r479263 - in head/science: . namd namd/files To: Adam Weinberger Cc: ports-committers@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, svn-ports-head@freebsd.org References: <201809082328.w88NSLVF073775@repo.freebsd.org> <536e5c65-b195-f629-6778-1935dc422b58@freebsd.org> From: Yuri Message-ID: Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2018 20:36:32 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2018 03:36:37 -0000 On 9/8/18 8:06 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote: > A compromise that linimon suggested on IRC is to replace the do-fetch > with a message that gives the URL and instruction for downloading the > official source code tarball. Other ports do this, and then there's no > way that we're violating their license terms. > > I agree with you (and linimon on IRC) that removing the port entirely > is unnecessary at this time, but until you hear back and get > confirmation that pulling from their git repo is okay, please just add > in a new do-fetch with a message telling users how to download the > official tarball. You could even rename the current do-fetch to > maintainer-fetch or something. Ok, thanks. I was thinking and going to suggest the same. Will do this. Yuri