On 2016-10-28 18:38, Franco Fichtner wrote:
I was talking about www/subsonic, sorry for the confusion: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213298
This bug shows the discussion I had with the Subsonic maintainer (who is, technically, until that patch is committed, still a maintainer) and carries the whole context. In short, the author of Subsonic has to specify what is the license of his product and include appropriate license in both the distributable/downloadable tarball and relevant source repositories.
As it is at the moment, it all points to it still being GPL'd, despite his announcements on the forum post linked in the issue, because the downloadable tarballs, at the time, I checked, still carried a README saying it's GPL'd.
A forum post is inadequate license change and the author should know better. His tarballs must include appropriate license whichever it is.
IMHO, the FreeBSD ports tree cannot continue to carry that port, 6.0+ onward because afaik one cannot retroactively change the licene of previous releases, until the license is well known and port possibly RESTRICTED if the license requires it. For example see Oracle JRE ports that require you to manually download the distfiles and agree to Oracle's license apriori.
-- Vlad K. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
