Re: ports licenses

2010-06-01 Thread Alexander Churanov
2010/5/31 Wesley Shields w...@freebsd.org: Matthew already pointed out CHANGES. A heads-up to this list from the author may have been nice but it really isn't that big of a deal. Maybe, for all I know, a message to this list is coming once everything is ironed out. Formal policies that

Re: ports licenses

2010-05-31 Thread Rob Farmer
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Wesley Shields w...@freebsd.org wrote: On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 02:29:45PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote: On Sun 30 May 2010 at 13:20:55 PDT Rene Ladan wrote: Hi, While adding license information to my ports (to be committed), I stumbled upon the following:

Re: ports licenses

2010-05-31 Thread Alexander Churanov
Wesley, I suggest additions to the ports development process: each time some mandatory or just desired feature is added to ports an e-mail to ports@ is sent, describing the feature or the link to Handbook. I've also just got to know about LICENSE* from this discussion thread. And I'm sure my

Re: ports licenses

2010-05-31 Thread Matthew Seaman
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 31/05/2010 13:48:15, Alexander Churanov wrote: I suggest additions to the ports development process: each time some mandatory or just desired feature is added to ports an e-mail to ports@ is sent, describing the feature or the link to Handbook.

Re: ports licenses

2010-05-31 Thread Wesley Shields
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 04:48:15PM +0400, Alexander Churanov wrote: Wesley, I suggest additions to the ports development process: each time some mandatory or just desired feature is added to ports an e-mail to ports@ is sent, describing the feature or the link to Handbook. Matthew already

ports licenses

2010-05-30 Thread Rene Ladan
Hi, While adding license information to my ports (to be committed), I stumbled upon the following: * devel/argouml uses Eclipse Public License (EPL) 1.0, but this one is not in bsd.licenses.db.mk * lang/bas2tap uses some homebrew license, but it has no formal name, so LICENSE_NAME cannot be

Re: ports licenses

2010-05-30 Thread Eitan Adler
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 11:20 PM, Rene Ladan r...@freebsd.org wrote: ... * lang/bas2tap uses some homebrew license, but it has no formal name, so LICENSE_NAME cannot be formally set. I think the first one can be added to bsd.license.db.mk, but I'm not sure what to do about the second one.

Re: ports licenses

2010-05-30 Thread Charlie Kester
On Sun 30 May 2010 at 13:20:55 PDT Rene Ladan wrote: Hi, While adding license information to my ports (to be committed), I stumbled upon the following: Is this something all maintainers should be doing? Yesterday, while upgrading my installed ports, I noticed a message in the output about

Re: ports licenses

2010-05-30 Thread Wesley Shields
On Sun, May 30, 2010 at 02:29:45PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote: On Sun 30 May 2010 at 13:20:55 PDT Rene Ladan wrote: Hi, While adding license information to my ports (to be committed), I stumbled upon the following: Is this something all maintainers should be doing? Yesterday, while

Re: ports licenses

2010-05-30 Thread Charlie Kester
On Sun 30 May 2010 at 14:40:38 PDT Wesley Shields wrote: I'd also say that if you have a regular update planned for a port that you submit the license information with that. Yeah, phasing it in along with other work makes sense. /visions of 20,000+ new PR's doing nothing but adding LICENSE