From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Mar 28 18:54:17 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from xxx.video-collage.com (xxx.video-collage.com [209.122.149.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4264237BE56 for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:54:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mi@video-collage.com) X-Relay-IP: ‚  Received: from video-collage.com (dufus [10.222.222.77]) by xxx.video-collage.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id VAA00849; Tue, 28 Mar 2000 21:54:00 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200003290254.VAA00849@xxx.video-collage.com> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 21:53:57 -0500 (EST) From: mi@video-collage.com Reply-To: Mikhail Teterin Subject: Re: ports/12739: New port: AT&T's DjVu Netscape plug-in To: Will Andrews Cc: Ade Lovett , freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20000328191304.D9136@argon.blackdawn.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 28 Mar, Will Andrews wrote: = > If it takes so little, why not leave it there? = When you consider ~1,500-2,500 ports with a.out support checking, you = quickly realize it doesn't take "so little". But this port does NOT check for a.out... It only checks if TAR is set and if not -- sets it... This can be removed if it bothers... = > Yes, but we don't have to go out of our way to enforce that -- = > again, we are not a party the agreement -- it is between user and = > AT&T. As a courtesy to the latter, we tell the user about it, but, = > strictly speaking, I don't think we are required to do that. = = I'm afraid that unless you're a lawyer, it simply makes better sense = to avoid any possible lawsuit with AT&T. So I think that this license = needs to be shown to the user and they need to accept it. The only = valid argument you've placed against this, which is that it requires = IS_INTERACTIVE, weighs less than the potential lawsuits. = I'm not trying to put you down here, I simply think that we should do = everything we can to avoid possible lawsuits, to the point of lunacy. = This is a free (as in "freedom") project and I would hate to see that = change. Well, I think, that by assuming responsibilities of a licensee we do indeed act as lunatics :-) The difference is you seem to be willing to act as such and I don't... (' Respectfully, -mi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message