[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: sex port and licenses
- To: ports_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: Re: sex port and licenses
- From: Christian Weisgerber <naddy_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 09:42:41 +0200
> Um, I think things *do* require licenses, including ports and packages.
> Theo has been pretty clear on that in the past. I don't think this is any
> different. If they aren't licensed they ought to go.
Ports _must_ have correct _licensing information_ (PERMIT_*). Ports of
software that doesn't allow redistribution (e.g. Netscape) are perfectly
acceptable, although we of course prefer free stuff. Common sense also
suggests to take the potential usefulness of a port into account.
By default all rights are reserved to the author, so if a distfile
doesn't contain any license we are denied redistribution and PERMIT_*
needs to reflect this.
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy_(_at_)_unix-ag_(_dot_)_uni-kl_(_dot_)_de