On 2018-05-24 20:56, Vincent Habchi wrote:
>> I don’t understand the licensing requirements, but I find this to be a
>> convenient port for getting Mr. Sid support with the MacPorts gdal. I find
>> it useful and hope that it can remain as long as it is appropriate.
>
> In any case, the support wouldn’t be removed. But, like I did with ECW API,
> MacPort’s official policy might force me to delete the port. You would then
> have to install the SDK manually in a predetermined place – thereby accepting
> the license – and the GDAL port variant would link against it.
What is the problem with the license? Is user agreement a strict
requirement before the software can even be downloaded?
We already have ports with other restrictive licenses in the tree, even
closed-source software. Set the license option accordingly and make sure
we are allowed to mirror and redistribute files (otherwise also add the
"NoMirror" license).
One possible way to handle download restrictions could be a pre-fetch {}
phase that checks for the existence of the distfile and prints an
explanation how to obtain it if it does not exist yet.
Rainer
