Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 18:39:02 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 187926] New port: devel/liballium - Tor pluggable transports utility library Message-ID: <bug-187926-13-fjmAhg0q9Y@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-187926-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-187926-13@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187926 --- Comment #29 from John Marino <marino@FreeBSD.org> --- (In reply to Adam Weinberger from comment #28) > John, your hyperbolic statements here suggest that you're getting worked up. > I would ask that you take a step back and a deep breath and/or a nice > sandwich before posting more replies. I'm going to take the sandwich route > myself. I don't know how this is coming across, but I'm not worked up. The only logical conclusion to that we *must* include the license is that we *must* fix all the other violators too. I don't understand any other conclusion. > John, do whatever makes you happy. I stand behind the decision to install a > copy of the license, as specified by the terms of the license. Using the > combination of LICENSE, LICENSE_FILE, LICENSE_NAME, and LICENSE_PERMS is not > mandatory, but honouring the terms of the license is. Okay, let's get's portmgr involved to finally stand behind the licence framework and make some rules. > Fabian, I and the port are not inventing a licensing scheme. We are > installing a copy of the license. I ask that you re-read this, because this > whole thing is coming down to you objecting to installing a copy of the > license. Correction: my objection is *where* to install it. I have no objection to not installing it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-187926-13-fjmAhg0q9Y>