On Oct 12, 2011, at 10:31, Clemens Lang wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:22:50AM -0500, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> Why should leaving the license field empty, and blocking so many >>> others ports from being able to be distributed, be acceptable? >> >> There are ports for which we cannot determine the license. It would be >> annoying to keep receiving lint notices for something we can't change. >> Hopefully there aren't so many of these though. > > Shouldn't we have a license value for those, too? Rather than just > skipping the license line, we could have something like > license undetermined > to mark somebody has looked into the license for this port and there is > none.
We've previously explicitly added "license unknown" to a few ports to indicate that. But that doesn't help differentiate in a search between those where we've already checked and those where we haven't. _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-dev
