Re: ports licenses
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 mandate this kind of stuff is unnecessary in my opinion. I've also just got to know about LICENSE* from this discussion thread. And I'm sure my ports do not contain license information. Like I said, I'd wait until it is clearly documented in the canonical source before I even begin to deal with it. I'm waiting on Porter's Handbook documentation that tells me how to use it. Not using this new LICENSE stuff in your ports is not harming anything right now, so just sit tight and wait until it's properly documented. None of my ports contain license information right now either. The author (alepulver@) has said in CHANGES that a PH entry will be available soon. -- WXS OK, Thank you for clarification. Alexander Churanov, maintainer of devel/boost-* ___ 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
Re: ports licenses
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: Is this something all maintainers should be doing? Yesterday, while upgrading my installed ports, I noticed a message in the output about LICENSE not being defined. I also see that there's now a bsd.licenses.mk and a bsd.licenses.db.mk in /usr/ports/Mk. I don't recall seeing those before, and don't know how long they've been there. Anyway, it looks like we're going ahead with this infrastructure, and I think that's a good thing. What actions do you need from me as a maintainer? They are both fairly new constructs. I don't recall exact dates but they are new enough that the documentation for them has not caught up yet that I'm aware of. I'd wait until the Porter's Handbook is updated for further clarification on what to do. If someone is preparing to update the handbook, I think clarifying the intended goal for bsd.licenses.db.mk is important. Is this file expected to grow rapidly and include anything used by multiple ports (for whatever definition of multiple) or is it primarily for the top 20 or so big licenses like the GPL? The case I have in mind is the CeCILL (http://www.cecill.info/licences/Licence_CeCILL_V2-en.html), which was written by the French government for stuff they fund. It is basically an uninteresting rewrite of the GPL adapted to deal with French patent laws. As such, not a whole lot of stuff uses it (or probably will in the forseeable future), but on the other hand it is explicitly listed on the FSF's approved licenses page. -- Rob Farmer I'd also say that if you have a regular update planned for a port that you submit the license information with that. -- WXS ___ 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 ___ 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
Re: ports licenses
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 ports do not contain license information. Alexander Churanov, maintainer of devel/boost-* ___ 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
Re: ports licenses
-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. I've also just got to know about LICENSE* from this discussion thread. And I'm sure my ports do not contain license information. Did you miss the 20100524 entry in /usr/ports/CHANGES ? Cheers Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate JID: matt...@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkwDtIoACgkQ8Mjk52CukIwofQCfWzr4Nc/Rqzswoqcd76MbuGMC MMQAn076Q4B/TW2ORC12bFtpzsiPNE8W =n2Zs -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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
Re: ports licenses
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 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 mandate this kind of stuff is unnecessary in my opinion. I've also just got to know about LICENSE* from this discussion thread. And I'm sure my ports do not contain license information. Like I said, I'd wait until it is clearly documented in the canonical source before I even begin to deal with it. I'm waiting on Porter's Handbook documentation that tells me how to use it. Not using this new LICENSE stuff in your ports is not harming anything right now, so just sit tight and wait until it's properly documented. None of my ports contain license information right now either. The author (alepulver@) has said in CHANGES that a PH entry will be available soon. -- WXS ___ 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
ports licenses
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 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. Regards, Rene -- http://www.rene-ladan.nl/ GPG fingerprint = ADBC ECCD EB5F A6B4 549F 600D 8C9E 647A E564 2BFC (subkeys.pgp.net) ___ 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
Re: ports licenses
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.
from bsd.licenses.mk
# Case 2: license only known by the port (aka unknown).
#
# In this case LICENSE_{PERMS,NAME} are mandatory, in addition to
# either LICENSE_FILE or LICENSE_TEXT. Optional variables are
# LICENSE_{GROUPS,NOTES}.
--
Eitan Adler
___
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
Re: ports licenses
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 LICENSE not being defined. I also see that there's now a bsd.licenses.mk and a bsd.licenses.db.mk in /usr/ports/Mk. I don't recall seeing those before, and don't know how long they've been there. Anyway, it looks like we're going ahead with this infrastructure, and I think that's a good thing. What actions do you need from me as a maintainer? ___ 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
Re: ports licenses
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 upgrading my installed ports, I noticed a message in the output about LICENSE not being defined. I also see that there's now a bsd.licenses.mk and a bsd.licenses.db.mk in /usr/ports/Mk. I don't recall seeing those before, and don't know how long they've been there. Anyway, it looks like we're going ahead with this infrastructure, and I think that's a good thing. What actions do you need from me as a maintainer? They are both fairly new constructs. I don't recall exact dates but they are new enough that the documentation for them has not caught up yet that I'm aware of. I'd wait until the Porter's Handbook is updated for further clarification on what to do. I'd also say that if you have a regular update planned for a port that you submit the license information with that. -- WXS ___ 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
Re: ports licenses
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 info ___ 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
