Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 25 Mar 2013 10:26:12 -0400
From:      Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>
To:        Alex Dupre <ale@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: LEGAL variable to capture generic issues
Message-ID:  <CAF6rxgnReoHLA0w6FAwB8KRnrx0dhCgTz%2B-avPtDODEvn3E%2B4w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <51505A60.8070809@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <CAF6rxgn1zN_5Gz_2Zrg7W==Q7SuLcXeWta0EE1Zkjq_jsPwtpg@mail.gmail.com> <515052EB.30409@FreeBSD.org> <CAF6rxg=DaYc_68AS-4-T6pJv1impWdB6Tv73m5Ld1W6nZuLQNg@mail.gmail.com> <51505A60.8070809@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 25 March 2013 10:08, Alex Dupre <ale@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Eitan Adler ha scritto:
>> RESTRICTED does not cover "special permission granted to distribute"
>> and other not-a-restriction things.
>
> And why do we need them? RESTRICTED is for !distributable, exactly as
> the LEGAL file. We can improve RESTRICTED to automatically generate LEGAL.

The LEGAL file is for a broader set of things than just RESTRICTED.
It covers "no commercial use" which is NO_CDROM but not RESTRICTED and
it covers "normally something else, but we have special permission to
use the GPLv3".  We have no way to express the latter in ports in a
usable manner.

> For particular licenses we already have a controversial LICENSE framework.

I have no comment on the framework.  It has many issues, but is not
related to this discussion.

-- 
Eitan Adler



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgnReoHLA0w6FAwB8KRnrx0dhCgTz%2B-avPtDODEvn3E%2B4w>