On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 04:51:30PM -0700, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On May 19, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Charlie Kester wrote: > > > > The ports in the devel category are especially noteworthy, since (if I > > understand correctly) their license will infect anything > > built with them. > > > > Is ports/LEGAL prominent enough? Should I also add something to the > > pkg-descr? > > > As an end-user I don't care about GPLv3 other than from a philosophical > stance; but using GPLv3 with FreeBSD as an employee is a non-starter, so > that's a good primary reason for the wiki page I think. > This data should really be inside the Makefile or something similar to > CATEGORIES, etc like Gentoo Linux does (at least you know what you're getting > before you install a package or port). That way other non-permissive licenses > could be audited before the package is installed and someone could make a > decision as to whether or not they can install it either because of licensing > constraints, export issues, or the like...
I'd go a step beyond that and suggest that GPL-licensed ports should have an EULA requiring the user to type yes or no, like parts of java and some other restrictively-licensed things. -- Indulekha Sharpe _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
