Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 08:21:31 +1000 From: Da Rock <freebsd-ports@herveybayaustralia.com.au> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mail/imaptools: port removal at Monday April 9th Message-ID: <4F8360EB.6090605@herveybayaustralia.com.au> In-Reply-To: <201204091749.q39HnYsF092884@fire.js.berklix.net> References: <201204091749.q39HnYsF092884@fire.js.berklix.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 04/10/12 03:49, Julian H. Stacey wrote: >> From: Chris Rees<crees@freebsd.org> >> >> Well, whatever he says, he can't revoke the license of what's already >> been distributed. >> >> ############################################################################ >> # Copyright (c) 2008 Rick Sanders<rfs9999@earthlink.net> # >> # # >> # Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute this software for any # >> # purpose with or without fee is hereby granted, provided that the above # >> # copyright notice and this permission notice appear in all copies. # > ... > > Exactly ! > > >> From: Mark Linimon<linimon@lonesome.com> >> portmgr's policy is to honor removal requests, no matter the circumstances. > ................................................ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > > Irresponsible. Real 'Managers' shoulder responsibility. So ... > > In /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk, define a warning variable after > NO_CDROM, NO_PACKAGE, [ RESTRICTED_FILES ], with example: > > WARNING+="Generic author tried to retrospectively withdraw sources." > # Maintainer suggest see files/...& http://... > > Allow individual ports Maintainers to indicate status of issues. > Allow individual installers to decide their Own take on issues, Not Yours ! > > - Ports wrappers belong to FreeBSD, not generic authors. > - Sources once published can't be unpublished. > (IMO No need of a new project& port name to excuse retention). > - Distfiles if not on freebsd.org site are not even our problem. > > portmgr should retain respect by dumping a foolish policy. sticking > to technical& avoiding programmers guesses& fears about laws, or > assumptions USA law controls global law or whatever else. Stay > technical. The globe has 196 countries with their own legal > jurisdictions, individual installers should be able to make their > own decision on law& risks& morality as localy appropriate. To stick my nose where it probably doesn't belong: indeed. This is one area where linux annoys the most for that very reason. Let the user decide and bear the responsibility.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F8360EB.6090605>